Jump to content

Recommended Posts

It’s still tyrannical there.  Sometimes people just assume because China’s economy has become a power that the rest of their society has also been liberalizing.  Not so.  Political dissidents, religious people, etc. are still persecuted and human rights are nonexistent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

 

19 minutes ago, longhornmatt said:

It’s still tyrannical there.  Sometimes people just assume because China’s economy has become a power that the rest of their society has also been liberalizing.  Not so.  Political dissidents, religious people, etc. are still persecuted and human rights are nonexistent.

 

This right here.  They put on a good face, but they're despots just the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

^^^^ This.  China is a horrible place.

The whole fucking place serves 3.2 beer. I feel that is warning enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Walden Ponderer said:

Admit it -- while you don't want to be scored personally, you'd love it if all those other assholes were.

Yep.  It's really easy to score them right now actually.  Trump supporter = automatic douchenozzle waste of humanity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People buy all this shit from China, not realizing or caring that they destroy human rights on a regular basis.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Biff Tannen said:

Yep.  It's really easy to score them right now actually.  Trump supporter = automatic douchenozzle waste of humanity.

example A - poster immediately below you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, LongestHorn said:

Americans will not spend $5000 on an iPhone manufactured and assembled in the US.  

The list of items manufactured and assembled in the U.S. that Americans cannot afford is almost too depressing to contemplate. Hell, we've had to use credit for most of the cheap crap we do buy for going on 40 years now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

The UK does this for hooligans too. 

Obligatory:

(are we allowed to joke in here?  Never sure, like no fighting in the War Room...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

China facial recognition software recognizes wanted man in crowd of 60,000.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-43751276

"An estimated 170 million CCTV cameras are already in place and some 400 million new ones are expected be installed in the next three years."

Incredible, what's at stake here.



 

Edited by Hornius Emeritus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, UTCzech III said:

Obligatory:

(are we allowed to joke in here?  Never sure, like no fighting in the War Room...)

I lived in two shithole towns in northwestern England for three years combined. Hicks could not be more wrong. Working class English " 'ooligans" are fucking savages who could tear up Port Arthur or Odessa on a Saturday night if nobody had guns. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, MaybeACoordinator said:

I lived in two shithole towns in northwestern England for three years combined. Hicks could not be more wrong. Working class English " 'ooligans" are fucking savages who could tear up Port Arthur or Odessa on a Saturday night if nobody had guns. 

But he's a stand up comic and what he was saying was funny.

And this is Murica, so errbody would have guns.

We win again. Suck it, England.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, David Dennison said:

But he's a stand up comic and what he was saying was funny.

And this is Murica, so errbody would have guns.

We win again. Suck it, England.

Even if you hate soccer, Among the Thugs is a great / window into English working class violence. 

 

Quote

This is a book designed to horrify. There’s a slight romanticism attached to the image of the hooligan in America: They’re more passionate than us. They sing. They live and die with the club. And maybe, the implication goes, they should be admired and emulated. Buford will quickly disabuse you of that notion. When you read of a drunken Manchester United thug who feigns kindness to a curious Italian youngster, only to draw him near and knee him in the testicles, you will feel a visceral revulsion. When you read about a man named Harry, whom “it was impossible not to like,” and who, in a fit of rage, knocked a policeman unconscious and proceeded to suck his eyeball out of its socket — an act so barbaric that I’ve only ever encountered it in a Cormac McCarthy novel — the sensation will double. And sooner or later, you’ll realize that the violence is distant from the soccer.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MaybeACoordinator said:

Even if you hate soccer, Among the Thugs is a great / window into English working class violence. 

 

 

It takes a special kind of depravity to suck someone's eyeball out of its socket.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, HenryJames said:

Do Chinese dip on planes?

Flew to Minneapolis and an asshole was dipping next to me. I was asleep and woke up to a big whiff of wintergreen. Sick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Taiwan was scrubbed from my biography.

I’d been invited to give a keynote speech and accept an award at Savannah State University’s Department of Journalism and Mass Communications. In a description of my background, I’d listed the self-governing island as one of the places where I’d reported. But in the printed materials for the event, the reference to Taiwan had been removed.

The department had given the award annually since 1975. But in the past few years, finances had dwindled and organizers struggled to find the resources to cover the expenses of bringing in a speaker from out of town.

Enter the Confucius Institute, a Chinese government-affiliated organization that teaches Chinese language and culture and sponsors educational exchanges, with more than 500 branches around the globe. The branch at Savannah State, founded four years ago, agreed to sponsor the speech.

On campuses across the United States, funding gaps are leaving departments with little choice but to turn to those groups with the deepest pockets — and China is keen to offer money, especially through its global network of Confucius Institutes. But when academic work touches on issues the Chinese Communist Party dislikes, things can get dicey.

The invitation came in part as a result of my work as the co-founder of an association for journalists who report on China. I knew about the Confucius Institute’s underwriting. Still, I didn’t want to prejudge, so I decided to attend, to focus my speech on China’s terrible human rights record, and to donate the honorarium to the Committee to Protect Journalists.

In a banquet hall full of journalism students, I spoke on issues I’d been writing about for years: the pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong, Chinese government repression of Uighurs and Tibetans, and Chinese President Xi Jinping’s crackdown on news outlets and the internet.

I could tell I was making at least one person uncomfortable — the Chinese co-director of the university’s Confucius Institute, Luo Qijuan.

When the event ended, Luo came over to scold me. Speaking in Chinese, she asked why I had criticized China. I should have given students a good impression of China, she said. Didn’t I know that Xi had done so much for the country, that his anti-corruption campaign was working?

“You don’t know the situation now,” she told me. “Things have gotten better.”

The opposite is true, of course. Xi has overseen a sweeping crackdown across Chinese society. During his tenure, the Communist Party has jailedhuman rights lawyers, constructed a high-tech surveillance regime in the far west, implementedstrict internet censorship, tightened media controls, denied Hong Kong the elections it had once promised, and crushed dissent.

As I later learned, it was Luo who insisted that the word “Taiwan” be deleted from my bio before the programs were printed. Luo told university administrators that its inclusion challenged Chinese sovereignty. She threatened to boycott the event if it was not removed.

It wasn’t the first time Luo had tried to bring educational programs more in line with the Chinese Communist Party’s core interests. One administrator told me on the day of the event that Luo had tried, unsuccessfully, to block a teacher of Taiwanese heritage from participating in a Confucius Institute-affiliated program for local public school teachers.

Luo did not respond to a request for comment, and neither did the university. But the executive director of the Confucius Institute’s public relations office in Washington, Gao Qing, tells me Taiwan was a “political topic” and therefore off limits in Confucius Institute events.

“The official policy of Confucius Institutes is to teach Chinese language (Mandarin) and cultivate cultural awareness. Confucius Institutes are not supposed to teach current policy and politics,” Gao says.

The censorship isn’t limited to Savannah State.

In 2009, North Carolina State University canceleda planned appearance by the Dalai Lama after its Confucius Institute director warned that the event might harm “strong relationships we were developing with China.” At a China studies academic conference in Portugal in 2014, a Confucius Institute administrator objected to conference materials relating to Taiwan; the materials were confiscated, and Taiwan-related pages were ripped out of the conference programs.

At the University of Albany, the Chinese co-director took down posters related to Taiwan in advance of a visit by officials from Hanban, the office affiliated with the Chinese Ministry of Education that runs the Confucius Institute.

“Usually there aren’t explicit regulations about things that can’t be said. But there is a very strong understanding that certain topics are off limits,” says Rachelle Peterson, the author of a 2017 reportabout Confucius Institutes published by the National Association of Scholars, a conservative advocacy group.

“To speak about China in a Confucius Institute is to speak about the good things. The other things don’t exist as far as the Confucius Institute is concerned.”

Some universities are fighting back. In 2013, McMaster University in Canada closed its Confucius Institute after one institute employee, who practiced Falun Gong, claimed she had faced pressure to hide her spiritual practice.

The University of Chicago closed its Confucius Institute in 2014, after a clash with a Hanban official. Pennsylvania State University followedsuit the same year. Two Texas A&M branch campuses announced in April that they would close their institutes as well.

But it’s not always so simple. Well-funded schools with established China studies programs have much more leverage over Confucius Institutes; the loss of a few hundred thousand dollars in programming can be replaced. But for lower-profile schools with fewer resources, Hanban funding may be the only opportunity students and community members get to study Chinese or travel to China. Those schools have a more difficult time pushing back against institute censorship.

Savannah State University does not have a well-funded Asian studies department, and as university administrators told me when I was there, its students and members of the surrounding community have few opportunities to travel abroad. The young man working at the front desk of my hotel in Savannah told me he was going to China this summer with a dance troupe, on a trip sponsored by the Confucius Institute. Without institute funding, the dancers would probably never see China.

And so, schools like Savannah State must walk a fine line. “Often the American co-director is interested in supporting academic freedom and trying to manage the Confucius Institute in a way that is constructive,” says Peterson. Each Confucius Institute has two co-directors, one American and one Chinese. But that’s “really hard to do. And in some cases, well near impossible.”

Some U.S. lawmakers are now trying to make that balancing act easier. The Foreign Influence Transparency Act, introduced this year by Sen. Marco Rubio, a Florida Republican, and Rep. Joe Wilson, a Republican from South Carolina, would require Confucius Institutes to register as foreign agents, which would force the institutes to disclose their funding and activities to the Justice Department. The bill would also require universities to disclose foreign funding in any amount over $50,000.

If passed, the bill would help university administrators compare their own agreements with Confucius Institutes to those at other universities, allowing them to make more informed decisions about the conditions, benefits, and risks of partnering with an institute on campus.

But some analysts argue that scrutiny and transparency aren’t enough; if Americans want students who are educated and knowledgeable on China, then the U.S. government has to start matching Chinese efforts with money of its own.

That’s because, as universities face budget cuts, language programs are often the first to go. Between 2013 and 2016, the number of students at U.S. colleges and universities enrolled in Chinese language classes fell from about 61,000 to just over 53,000, a drop of 13.1 percent, according to studiesby the Modern Language Association.

By contrast, enrollment at the University of Mississippi’s Chinese-language program remains steady. The university is home to a U.S. government-funded Chinese Language Flagship Program.

It’s natural for universities like Savannah State to want to maximize opportunities for their students. But as long as money is tight and the Chinese government is ready to fill the funding void, Confucius Institutes will continue to have leverage over U.S. campuses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Fastbreak said:

Most every single adult in the US has multiple scores attached to them, credit, insurance, etc.

Financial risk, financial risk, etc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Taiwan was scrubbed from my biography.

I’d been invited to give a keynote speech and accept an award at Savannah State University’s Department of Journalism and Mass Communications. In a description of my background, I’d listed the self-governing island as one of the places where I’d reported. But in the printed materials for the event, the reference to Taiwan had been removed.

The department had given the award annually since 1975. But in the past few years, finances had dwindled and organizers struggled to find the resources to cover the expenses of bringing in a speaker from out of town.

Enter the Confucius Institute, a Chinese government-affiliated organization that teaches Chinese language and culture and sponsors educational exchanges, with more than 500 branches around the globe. The branch at Savannah State, founded four years ago, agreed to sponsor the speech.

On campuses across the United States, funding gaps are leaving departments with little choice but to turn to those groups with the deepest pockets — and China is keen to offer money, especially through its global network of Confucius Institutes. But when academic work touches on issues the Chinese Communist Party dislikes, things can get dicey.

The invitation came in part as a result of my work as the co-founder of an association for journalists who report on China. I knew about the Confucius Institute’s underwriting. Still, I didn’t want to prejudge, so I decided to attend, to focus my speech on China’s terrible human rights record, and to donate the honorarium to the Committee to Protect Journalists.

In a banquet hall full of journalism students, I spoke on issues I’d been writing about for years: the pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong, Chinese government repression of Uighurs and Tibetans, and Chinese President Xi Jinping’s crackdown on news outlets and the internet.

I could tell I was making at least one person uncomfortable — the Chinese co-director of the university’s Confucius Institute, Luo Qijuan.

When the event ended, Luo came over to scold me. Speaking in Chinese, she asked why I had criticized China. I should have given students a good impression of China, she said. Didn’t I know that Xi had done so much for the country, that his anti-corruption campaign was working?

“You don’t know the situation now,” she told me. “Things have gotten better.”

The opposite is true, of course. Xi has overseen a sweeping crackdown across Chinese society. During his tenure, the Communist Party has jailedhuman rights lawyers, constructed a high-tech surveillance regime in the far west, implementedstrict internet censorship, tightened media controls, denied Hong Kong the elections it had once promised, and crushed dissent.

As I later learned, it was Luo who insisted that the word “Taiwan” be deleted from my bio before the programs were printed. Luo told university administrators that its inclusion challenged Chinese sovereignty. She threatened to boycott the event if it was not removed.

It wasn’t the first time Luo had tried to bring educational programs more in line with the Chinese Communist Party’s core interests. One administrator told me on the day of the event that Luo had tried, unsuccessfully, to block a teacher of Taiwanese heritage from participating in a Confucius Institute-affiliated program for local public school teachers.

Luo did not respond to a request for comment, and neither did the university. But the executive director of the Confucius Institute’s public relations office in Washington, Gao Qing, tells me Taiwan was a “political topic” and therefore off limits in Confucius Institute events.

“The official policy of Confucius Institutes is to teach Chinese language (Mandarin) and cultivate cultural awareness. Confucius Institutes are not supposed to teach current policy and politics,” Gao says.

The censorship isn’t limited to Savannah State.

In 2009, North Carolina State University canceleda planned appearance by the Dalai Lama after its Confucius Institute director warned that the event might harm “strong relationships we were developing with China.” At a China studies academic conference in Portugal in 2014, a Confucius Institute administrator objected to conference materials relating to Taiwan; the materials were confiscated, and Taiwan-related pages were ripped out of the conference programs.

At the University of Albany, the Chinese co-director took down posters related to Taiwan in advance of a visit by officials from Hanban, the office affiliated with the Chinese Ministry of Education that runs the Confucius Institute.

“Usually there aren’t explicit regulations about things that can’t be said. But there is a very strong understanding that certain topics are off limits,” says Rachelle Peterson, the author of a 2017 reportabout Confucius Institutes published by the National Association of Scholars, a conservative advocacy group.

“To speak about China in a Confucius Institute is to speak about the good things. The other things don’t exist as far as the Confucius Institute is concerned.”

Some universities are fighting back. In 2013, McMaster University in Canada closed its Confucius Institute after one institute employee, who practiced Falun Gong, claimed she had faced pressure to hide her spiritual practice.

The University of Chicago closed its Confucius Institute in 2014, after a clash with a Hanban official. Pennsylvania State University followedsuit the same year. Two Texas A&M branch campuses announced in April that they would close their institutes as well.

But it’s not always so simple. Well-funded schools with established China studies programs have much more leverage over Confucius Institutes; the loss of a few hundred thousand dollars in programming can be replaced. But for lower-profile schools with fewer resources, Hanban funding may be the only opportunity students and community members get to study Chinese or travel to China. Those schools have a more difficult time pushing back against institute censorship.

Savannah State University does not have a well-funded Asian studies department, and as university administrators told me when I was there, its students and members of the surrounding community have few opportunities to travel abroad. The young man working at the front desk of my hotel in Savannah told me he was going to China this summer with a dance troupe, on a trip sponsored by the Confucius Institute. Without institute funding, the dancers would probably never see China.

And so, schools like Savannah State must walk a fine line. “Often the American co-director is interested in supporting academic freedom and trying to manage the Confucius Institute in a way that is constructive,” says Peterson. Each Confucius Institute has two co-directors, one American and one Chinese. But that’s “really hard to do. And in some cases, well near impossible.”

Some U.S. lawmakers are now trying to make that balancing act easier. The Foreign Influence Transparency Act, introduced this year by Sen. Marco Rubio, a Florida Republican, and Rep. Joe Wilson, a Republican from South Carolina, would require Confucius Institutes to register as foreign agents, which would force the institutes to disclose their funding and activities to the Justice Department. The bill would also require universities to disclose foreign funding in any amount over $50,000.

If passed, the bill would help university administrators compare their own agreements with Confucius Institutes to those at other universities, allowing them to make more informed decisions about the conditions, benefits, and risks of partnering with an institute on campus.

But some analysts argue that scrutiny and transparency aren’t enough; if Americans want students who are educated and knowledgeable on China, then the U.S. government has to start matching Chinese efforts with money of its own.

That’s because, as universities face budget cuts, language programs are often the first to go. Between 2013 and 2016, the number of students at U.S. colleges and universities enrolled in Chinese language classes fell from about 61,000 to just over 53,000, a drop of 13.1 percent, according to studiesby the Modern Language Association.

By contrast, enrollment at the University of Mississippi’s Chinese-language program remains steady. The university is home to a U.S. government-funded Chinese Language Flagship Program.

It’s natural for universities like Savannah State to want to maximize opportunities for their students. But as long as money is tight and the Chinese government is ready to fill the funding void, Confucius Institutes will continue to have leverage over U.S. campuses.

Sneaky little bastards. Ironically, aggy severed ties with the institute but probably engages in similar white washing shenanigans.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a black mirror episode about this. Can't wait to see how it plays out. Another great leap forward for China?

The first one was that four pests campaign, killed all the sparrows and ended up causing a huge increase in insects that ate all the crops and starved their people.

Then they tried the meltdown all farm equipment for steel to become an industrial superpower, starved their people. 

Then there was the one baby policy, ended with a massive shortage of females.

Feels bad man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/25/2018 at 1:15 PM, Zepol87 said:

Flew to Minneapolis and an asshole was dipping next to me. I was asleep and woke up to a big whiff of wintergreen. Sick

When did you get so fuckin delicate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Senate voted Monday to reimpose the U.S. ban on Chinese telecom giant ZTE, in a rebuke to President Donald Trump and his efforts to keep the company in business. 

The provision targeting ZTE was part of the National Defense Authorization Act, a must-pass defense spending bill that cleared the Senate by a vote of 85-10.It must now be reconciled with the House version of the measure, which takes a narrower approach to ZTE.

 

xi-jinping-winnie.jpg

Edited by Hugo Stiglitz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are all caught in various matrices.

Experian, TransUnion, and Equifax score you on credit.

The government maintains several scoring matrices defining the bad apples among us including the no fly list and the NCTC's disposition matrix

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So are the tariffs good or bad for America? How about China? What if we take their North Korean puppet and embolden Taiwan to split completly and permanently from China?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Zepol87 said:

This ZTE stuff is bad for my company. That's all I know

Which part?  Their survival or banning from the US?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - A sophisticated hacking campaign launched from computers in China burrowed deeply into satellite operators, defense contractors and telecommunications companies in the United States and southeast Asia, security researchers at Symantec Corp said on Tuesday.

Symantec said the effort appeared to be driven by national espionage goals, such as the interception of military and civilian communications. 

Such interception capabilities are rare but not unheard of, and the researchers could not say what communications, if any, were taken. More disturbingly in this case, the hackers infected computers that controlled the satellites, so that they could have changed the positions of the orbiting devices and disrupted data traffic, Symantec said. 

“Disruption to satellites could leave civilian as well as military installations subject to huge (real world) disruptions,” said Vikram Thakur, technical director at Symantec. “We are extremely dependent on their functionality.”

Satellites are critical to phone and some internet links as well as mapping and positioning data. 

Symantec, based in Mountain View, California, described its findings to Reuters exclusively ahead of a planned public release. It said the hackers had been removed from infected systems.

Symantec said it has already shared technical information about the hack with the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation and Department of Homeland Security, along with public defense agencies in Asia and other security companies. The FBI did not respond to a request for comment. 

Thakur said Symantec detected the misuse of common software tools at client sites in January, leading to the campaign’s discovery at unnamed targets. He attributed the effort to a group that Symantec calls Thrip, which may be called different names by other companies. 

Thrip was active from 2013 on and then vanished from the radar for about a year until the last campaign started a year ago. In that period, it developed new tools and began using more widely available administrative and criminal programs, Thakur said. 

Other security analysts have also recently tied sophisticated attacks to Chinese groups that had been out of sight for awhile, and there could be overlap. FireEye Inc in March said that a group it called Temp.Periscope reappeared last summer and went after defense companies and shippers. FireEye had no immediate comment on the new episode. 

It was unclear how Thrip gained entry to the latest systems. In the past, it depended on trick emails that had infected attachments or led recipients to malicious links. This time, it did not infect most user computers, instead moving among servers, making detection harder. 

Following its customary stance, Symantec did not directly blame the Chinese government for the hack. It said the hackers launched their campaign from three computers on the mainland. In theory, those machines could have been compromised by someone elsewhere. 

Symantec provides the most widely used paid security software for consumers and an array of higher-end software and services for companies and public agencies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Bill Clinton said:

So are the tariffs good or bad for America? How about China? What if we take their North Korean puppet and embolden Taiwan to split completly and permanently from China?

I'm wondering if the price of imported guitars is going to go up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(CNN)Lasers have been used to target US aerial operations in the Pacific, with 20 incidents recorded since September of last year, according to a US military official. 

The military spokeswoman, who requested not to be named, told CNN that lasers had been flashed at US aircraft, and that the sources of these flashes are suspected to be Chinese. 

The latest incident occurred within the last two weeks, the official said.

None of the incidents have resulted in any medical complaints or injuries, the spokeswoman said. The attacks appear similar to incidents that occurred in the East African country of Djibouti earlier in the year, when US military airmen were injured by lasers which the US military said originated from a nearby Chinese military base.

At a regular press briefing Friday, Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Geng Shuang said: "According to what we have learned from the relevant authorities, the accusations in the relevant reports by US media are totally groundless and purely fabricated." 

Disputed territory

The latest round of suspected laser attacks have all occurred in and around the East China Sea, which is home to disputed island chains, including the Senkaku, claimed by both Japan and China, where they are known as the Diaoyu. 

The area's waters are near heavy-traffic shipping lanes, and are used regularly by both Japanese and Chinese military and civilian ships, as well as a semi-autonomous "maritime militia" which defends China's territorial interests in the region. 

The Wall Street Journal reported that military officials don't necessarily believe the attacks were initiated by official Chinese military sources, but would not rule out that those responsible were acting on behalf of the Chinese government. 

Aviation Week & Space Technology, an industry publication, quoted a spokeswoman for the US Marines who said that the attacks had originated "from a range of different sources, both ashore and from fishing vessels." 

As with Chinese territorial ambitions in the South China Sea, tensions to the north have flashed numerous times in recent years over the disputed islands, including face-offs between Japanese and Chinese air and naval forces that have been termed dangerous by both sides. 

In February this year, US Defense Secretary James Mattis reaffirmed the US' treaty commitment to defending Japan and its disputed islands.

Similar incidents

The incidents in the region over the past several months echo similar tactics the Pentagon says were carried out by the Chinese military earlier this year, when personnel at the country's first overseas military base in Djibouti used military-grade lasers to interfere with US military aircraft from a nearby American base. 

The official CNN spoke to would not confirm that the lasers used in the Pacific were military- or commercial-grade, but even off-the-shelf laser pointers can cause a hazard to pilots. Aiming a laser beam at an aircraft in the US is a federal crime.

In the Djibouti incident, the activity resulted in injuries to US pilots, and prompted the US to launch a formal diplomatic protest with Beijing, military officials told CNN.

Chinese state media denied the original claims by US defense officials, accusing them of "cooking up phony laser stories."

Following the East Africa incident, a US defense official told CNN that the military also believed the Chinese were using similar lasers to interfere with US aircraft in the South China Sea.

2015 report in the official Chinese military newspaper the PLA Daily noted that "China has been updating its home-made blinding laser weapons in recent years to meet the needs of different combat operations."

According to the report, Chinese forces have access to at least four different types of portable blinding laser weapons, all of which look like oversized modified assault rifles.

Both China and the US are signatories to the Protocol on Blinding Laser Weapons, which prohibits the use of blinding laser weapons as a means or method of warfare.

Sonic attacks

The purported laser attacks come just after a number of US government personnel in China were sent back to the United States for further health screenings after concerns over reports of mysterious acoustic incidents similar to "sonic attacks" first encountered by diplomats at the US' embassy in Cuba. 

The screenings came after a US government employee in Guangzhou fell ill in early 2018 after reporting "abnormal sensations of sound and pressure" which resulted in a mild brain injury.

Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Hua Chunying said earlier this month that they had not found any "reason or clue that would lead to the situation reported by the US."

 

https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/22/politics/pacific-ocean-us-military-jets-lasers-intl/index.html

Edited by Hugo Stiglitz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought I heard a story on NPR about China ramping up their active measures campaign. Can't find it ...

David Sanger's interview on NPR from earlier in the week predicts that the first strike in the next big war will be a cyber attack, then military.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mpu


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Recruiting ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Help ... For Sale ... Politics ... Board Discussion
×
×
  • Create New...