Video: Post-9/11 wars: a defeat of Western values, fake freedom democracy human rights and rules of laws 9/11 後戰爭：西方價值觀的失敗、它們虛假的自由民主人權和法律規則 After the 9/11 attacks, the US made the decision to invade Afghanistan and Iraq. The wars in the next two decades resulted in heavy casualties and ended in disastrous failure. As for US, it’s not just a military defeat but a defeat of Western values. https://vimeo.com/602058223 https://youtu.be/nHyBNcK2Kxk https://www.facebook.com/100036400039778/posts/564121758144487/?d=n
Xi-Biden 2nd call positive sign amid fraught ties; signals growing US anxiety to seek China’s help by GT staff reporters Sep 10 2021
Chinese President Xi Jinping on Friday told US President Joe Biden that the US’ policies toward China have caused serious difficulties in bilateral relations and called on Washington to shoulder responsibilities to direct the ties back on the right track, in the first phone conversation between the two leaders in seven months amid escalating tensions and a series of regional and global challenges, including the US’ hasty withdrawal from Afghanistan.
The phone call, which took place at the US’ request, highlighted Washington’s growing anxiety and need for China’s cooperation on key global issues including climate change, COVID-19 fight and Afghan issues, analysts said. While the discussions sent positive signals that both sides are aiming to maintain communication, the US should take more action in correcting previous wrong deeds and respecting China’s basic interests, and not expecting China to cooperate while keeping it as an adversary, analysts said.
In a statement released after the phone call by the Chinese side, it said the two leaders had candid, in-depth and extensive strategic communication and exchanges on China-US relations and relevant issues of mutual interest.
Xi stressed in the phone call that for some time, due to the US policy on China, the China-US relationship has run into serious difficulty. This serves neither the fundamental interests of the people of the two countries, nor the common interests of countries around the world. “When China and the US cooperate, the two countries and the world will benefit; when China and the United States are in confrontation, the two countries and the world will suffer,” Xi said.
“Getting the relationship right is not an option, but something we must do and must do well,” Xi said.
Biden noted that the US-China relationship is the most consequential relationship in the world, and the future of the bulk of the world will depend on how the US and China get on with each other. The two countries have no interest in letting competition veer into conflict.
Biden reiterated during the conversation that the US has no intention of changing its one-China principle. It is prepared to have more candid exchanges and constructive discussions with China to identify key and priority areas where cooperation is possible, avoid miscommunication, miscalculation and unintended conflict, and get US-China relations back on track.
The second phone conversation between the two leaders was held upon the invitation from the US and “upon the invitation from the US” was the phrase we recently saw in releases on communications between high-level officials of the two countries, Su Xiaohui, deputy director of the Department for International and Strategic Studies of China Institute of International Studies, told the Global Times.
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken held a phone call with Wang Yi on August 29 in which the pair discussed the topics of Afghan issues and US Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry communicated with Wang via video link last week – all were made at the invitation of the US.
The US’ willingness to communicate with China is very clear as the Biden administration is facing huge pressure domestically with crises on multiple fronts, Su noted.
Echoing Su, Li Haidong, a professor at the Institute of International Relations of the China Foreign Affairs University, said that US’ requesting more dialogue showed that the Biden administration is under great pressure – it wants to compete with China while wanting to avoid conflicts; it could not deal with some major global issues, including the Afghan issues and climate change without China but at the same time remains obsessed with weakening what they call the “strategic rival.”
These contradictions have put Biden in a bind and have given China the upper hands in steering bilateral ties, Li told the Global Times.
The complicated domestic political situation in the US has also given Biden great headache as he may face more difficulties in promoting cooperation with China than upholding competition and conflicts with China. Whether Biden is able to avoid the competition turning into clashes remains a big question, Li noted.
However, the differences between China and the US when it comes to viewing bilateral ties was revealed in the public releases from each side–China insists that the bilateral cooperation has no alternative and must be achieved for the benefit of both sides, the US pays attention to “conflicts” and is seeking to maintain controllable competition with China, Li noted.
More action needed
Friday’s phone call was the second between leaders of the two countries since Biden took office. Xi took the first call from Biden on the eve of Chinese Lunar New Year.
While analysts reached by the Global Times agreed that Friday’s phone call is a positive signal for the bilateral ties which has been at a low point due to US’ provocative action toward China, they also urged the US to take more actions to promote relations.
The talk between top leaders of China and the US is timely and positive as the US has realized the need to listen to and face to China’s role and expectations. After Biden took the office in January, he has adopted Trump’s tactics of suppressing China, undermining China’s red line and straining China-US ties, Zhu Feng, director of Institute of International Studies of Nanjing University, told the Global Times.
During several rounds of “battle,” including the meeting in Anchorage in March and Deputy secretary of state Wendy Sherman’s visit to Tianjin, China has made its stance clear that if the US did not respect the “two lists” and “three bottom lines,” it should not expect China to cooperate while suppressing it, Zhu said.
When meeting with Sherman in Tianjin, Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Xie Feng presented her with “List of US Wrongdoings that Must Stop” and the “List of Key Individual Cases that China Has Concerns With.”
Chinese State Councilor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi also drew three bottom lines on China-US relations when meeting with Sherman, including not to challenge, slander or even attempt to subvert the path and system of socialism with Chinese characteristics, not attempt to obstruct or interrupt China’s development process, and not infringe upon China’s state sovereignty or damage China’s territorial integrity.
The Friday’s phone call revealed that the two sides reached three points of consensus – both recognized the significance of communication and dialogue, expected the bilateral ties to be maneuvered back on the right track and both agreed to more cooperation, Liu Chang, assistant research fellow with the Department for American Studies at China Institute of International Studies, told the Global Times.
According to a release from China, the two leaders agreed to maintain frequent contact by multiple means and instruct officials at the working level to intensify the work, conduct extensive dialogue and create conditions for the further development of China-US relations.
“We hope that China and the US may have discussions over some concrete issues in the third and fourth quarter of the year, for example on trade talks – to correct willful policies made by former president Donald Trump. This would be a great encouragement to not only US companies but its customers,” Lü Xiang, a research fellow at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences in Beijing, told the Global Times.
The two militaries may also engage in dialogue given that US missile destroyers’ have been monitored illegally entering waters in the South China Sea, a provocative act, Lü noted, saying that more communications are needed to avoid future clashes.
US Guided-missile destroyer USS Benfold trespassed in waters near the Meiji Reef in the South China Sea Wednesday without permission from China. The Chinese side mobilized aircraft and ships to warn off and expel the ship from the waters.
Although the phone call set a basic tone for the long-term China-US relations, analysts said that they do not expect that a single phone call will solve the structural and complex contradictions facing China-US relations.
The statement of the White House did not mention anything said by the Chinese side, saying Biden made clear that the discussion was part of the “US’ ongoing effort to responsibly manage the competition between the United States and the PRC,” and Biden underscored the US’ “enduring interest in peace, stability, and prosperity in the Indo-Pacific” and the world.
White House’s statement showed that US’ China policy was still focusing on competition, confrontation and cooperation, and by specifically mentioning the Indo-Pacific region, Biden is also trying to pacify his allies, especially those in Europe that were angered by US’ chaotic pullout from Afghanistan, and pave a way for his follow-up diplomatic moves in the upcoming “quad” summit this month, Liu said.
On the same day when the top leaders of China and the US had their phone conversation, Chinese Ambassador Qin Gang posted a picture on his Twitter account of himself talking with Henry Kissinger, the former US secretary of state who made a secret trip to China on July 9, 1971 and sparked a new era for the China-US ties.
The Chinese ambassador tweeted that “Had a great time with Dr. Kissinger and benefited a lot from his vision, wisdom and insights.”
Zhu said that while the China-US ties are strained, more positive voices should be brought to the fore by US scholars and former officers who have real strategic insights. Kissinger is one of them and his judgment is valuable. Ambassador Qin’s meeting with Kissinger may also reflect his hope for more positive forces in promoting bilateral relations under the current circumstance.
A US federal judge has acquitted former University of Tennessee (UT) professor Hu Anming of fraud charges in the first case to go to trial under the controversial “China Initiative” started by the Trump administration as part of witch hunt attempted to demonize Chinese working in American universities. 根據特朗普政府發起的有爭議的“中國倡議”獵巫行動試圖妖魔化在美國大學工作的中國人. 美國聯邦法官宣布前田納西大學 (UT) 教授的欺詐指控無罪.
A Military Solution to a Commercial Problem – It Probably Ain’t Gonna Work Much Longer by FRED REED SEPTEMBER 8, 2021
In pondering Washington’s new toy, a cold war against China, one sees a pattern. China’s approach to influence and prosperity is commercial and longsighted. This does not mean that the Chinese are warm and fuzzy, only intelligent. They advance their interests while turning a profit, which wars don’t. China invests heavily in the infrastructure, both physical and educational, that makes for current and future competitiveness. They are fast, agile, innovative, and imperfectly scrupulous. They seek trade agreements: The Comprehensive Agreement on Investment with Europe, The RCEP, Regional comprehensive Economic Partnership, the CPEC, China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, the huge Iran deal, the development with Russia of the NSR, the Northern Sea Route. They seem good at it, China now being the largest trading partner of something like 165 countries.
Washington’s approach is military, coercive, shortsighted, and commercially dimwitted. It forms military alliances: the Quad in the Indian Ocean, with Japan against China, puts missiles in South Korea, pushes Europe to buy more American weaponry, sends naval forces to the Indian Ocean, Taiwan Strait, South China Sea, Black Sea, and Persian Gulf to intimidate, without much success, China, Russia, and Iran. It wants to get the Ukraine and Georgia into NATO to threaten Russia. It makes as much sense as lug nuts on a birthday cake.
China’s major capital expenditures, as gleaned as best I can from pubs covering these: highways, dams, bridges, very-high-voltage power lines, airports, rail, new high-tech 360 mph rail, five-g implementation, reactors, and semiconductor catchup.
America’s major capital expenditures: the B-21, F-35, Virginia-class subs, , Ford-class aircraft carriers, SSN (x) attack submarine. Biden says he will build infrastructure but, if history is a guide, he will pander to the woke, fight systemic racism, promote LBGQXYZ, become mired in congressional infighting, and the whole thing will devolve into pork. Want to bet?
What are these weapons for? The B-21 is an intercontinental nuclear bomber. What does one do with intercontinental nuclear bombers? Engage in intercontinental nuclear war. Are we sure this is a good idea? There will be no such war unless America starts it. China isn’t going to since (a) its approach to power and influence is commercial, which is working well, and (b) America has so many, many nuclear weapons of all sorts that China would be obliterated. If the US launched a first strike, the bombers would get there hours after the war was over. What would be the point?
The point is to funnel vast amounts of money into a bloated, running-on-autopilot military business so large that it can’t be reduced or controlled. All of this send-money PR assumes that China thinks it needs a nuclear holocaust. Who can doubt it?
It is impossible even to leave the military budget as it is, much less reduce it.
Congress Moves to Increase Pentagon Budget, Defying Biden
Military industry is so pervasive, providing so many jobs in so many states with so many lobbyists, that the President and his party cannot control it
China-Africa trade hits record high of $139.1 billion from January to July: MOFCOM
America sends troops (Africom, Africa Command) and builds drone bases. China builds rail lines and buys up resources. Did we say something about a pattern?
What is a Ford-class carrier good for? The Fords are versatile ships, having a three-fold purpose: Funneling lots of money into military industry, killing defenseless peasants, and sticking the Pentagon’s tongue out at China. Killing peasants and soldiers in third-rate armies of bedraggled third-world countries is what the American military does. Think Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Somalia. Getting into big wars with real countries is no longer practical despite the opportunities for profits because big countries depend on each other too much commercially. Even killing peasants begins to lose cache, as witness the comic opera defeat in Afghanistan..
Congress Pushes for Weapons the Pentagon Doesn’t want
A list of examples from Ohio. When military industry wants to produce a new weapon, it makes sure that components are produced in as many states as possible. But some things should be obvious. A big-ticket carrier creates a huge number of jobs for years at Newport News as well as jobs all over America for parts. When the carrier is completed and sails off to kill its peasants, the town goes into depression and stockholders lose dividends. The Pentagon then discovers an urgent need for another carrier. Congress shares this sense of urgency. Surprise, surprise.
What do I mean in saying that America is “short-sighted”? Try this:
Oregon Governor Kate Brown quietly signed a bill last month that removed the requirement for graduating high school children in the state to be proficient in reading, writing, and math, in an effort to aid “students of color.”
Wowee, that must terrify them over in China’s engineering departments, where students are years ahead of American in mathematics. This sort of thing goes on across America.
Number of Chinese overseas military bases: 1 (Djibouti) American: Hundreds. Number of Chinese military conflicts: One, a minor border clash with India. American: You know the list as well as I do, with Iran perhaps being groomed for the next war. Which country spends more on the foregoing? What has America gained?
ORAN an Also Ran to Huawei Five-G This is long and kind of techy but makes the point that China is leaving the US far behind in five-g. While many think of Five-G as being for use in smart phones, this is actually of negligible importance. Where it counts is in industry, robotics, smart cities, mining with nobody underground, on and on. The United States, unable to compete with Huawei, consigned itself to primitivism by excluding the Chinese. Then it failed in its attempt to prevent China from rolling out five-g within its own borders. So much for bringing manufacturing back to America.
China Overtakes US in AI Research And whose fault is this?
China Passes US in Output of Influential Science Papers
Here is a point worth noting. The Chinese have the engineers, the numbers and the focus to do pretty much anything. They do not always have the machinery. AI takes more brains than machinery.
CATL goes all in on next-gen sodium-ion EV batteries
Not a game-changer, and other countries look at the same thing but, as so often, China is right up there with the other big boys.
“Last month, during high-level talks in Honolulu, the US Indo-Pacific Command and the Federated States of Micronesia (FSM) agreed to build a new base in the island nation.” To contain China.
Military, military, military, military. The assumption in the Five Sided Wind Box seems to be that China is about to come roaring into the Pacific like the Japanese Imperial Naby in full flood, to conquer it. China is more likely to buy it.
Associated Press: “The politically sensitive goods deficit with China rose to $27.8 billion in June, up 5.8% from the May level. So far this year, the goods deficit with China, the largest that the United States runs with any country, totals $158.5 billion, an increase of 19.2% compared to the same period in 2020.”
Some economists predict America’s first overall trade deficit of a trillion dollars.
China to run commercial port in Israel: “China’s state-owned Shanghai International Port Group (SIPG) grabbed the Haifa port contract in 2015 which allows it to operate the commercial shipping facility for 25 years.”
Commercial, commercial, commercial, commercial.
Moscow Bothered by ‘Uncontrolled, Unrestricted Expansion’ of US Military Biolab Network Near Russia
And here in Mexico, where I live, people swear they see Chinese electric scooters and mini-electric which, they also swear, can be bought online from Alibaba and such. Meanwhile the narcos get assault rifles from the US.
How can America wake up from its post-9/11 nightmare? After 20 years of war and militarism that has only left the world a more dangerous place and accelerated America’s decline, we must choose the path of peace. By Medea Benjamin and Nicolas J. S. Davies – September 9, 2021
Looking back on it now, the 1990s were an age of innocence for America. The Cold War was over and our leaders promised us a “peace dividend.” There was no TSA to make us take off our shoes at airports (how many bombs have they found in those billions of shoes?). The government could not tap a U.S. phone or read private emails without a warrant from a judge. And the national debt was only $5 trillion – compared with over $28 trillion today.
We have been told that the criminal attacks of September 11, 2001 “changed everything.” But what really changed everything was the U.S. government’s disastrous response to them.
That response was not preordained or inevitable, but the result of decisions and choices made by politicians, bureaucrats and generals who fueled and exploited our fears, unleashed wars of reprehensible vengeance and built a secretive security state, all thinly disguised behind Orwellian myths of American greatness.
Most Americans believe in democracy and many regard the United States as a democratic country. But the U.S. response to 9/11 laid bare the extent to which American leaders are willing to manipulate the public into accepting illegal wars, torture, the Guantanamo gulag and sweeping civil rights abuses—activities that undermine the very meaning of democracy.
Former Nuremberg prosecutor Ben Ferencz said in a speech in 2011 that “a democracy can only work if its people are being told the truth.” But America’s leaders exploited the public’s fears in the wake of 9/11 to justify wars that have killed and maimed millions of people who had nothing to do with those crimes. Ferencz compared this to the actions of the German leaders he prosecuted at Nuremberg, who also justified their invasions of other countries as “preemptive first strikes.”
“You cannot run a country as Hitler did, feeding them a pack of lies to frighten them that they’re being threatened, so it’s justified to kill people you don’t even know,” Ferencz continued. “It’s not logical, it’s not decent, it’s not moral, and it’s not helpful. When an unmanned bomber from a secret American airfield fires rockets into a little Pakistani or Afghan village and thereby kills or maims unknown numbers of innocent people, what is the effect of that? Every victim will hate America forever and will be willing to die killing as many Americans as possible. Where there is no court of justice, wild vengeance is the alternative.”
Even the commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, General Stanley McChrystal, talked about “insurgent math,” conjecturing that, for every innocent person killed, the U.S. created 10 new enemies. And thus the so-called Global War on Terror fueled a global explosion of terrorism and armed resistance that will not end unless and until the United States ends the state terrorism that provokes and fuels it.
By opportunistically exploiting 9/11 to attack countries that had nothing to do with it, like Iraq, Somalia, Libya, Syria and Yemen, the United States vastly expanded the destructive strategy it used in the 1980s to destabilize Afghanistan, which spawned the Taliban and Al Qaeda in the first place.
In Libya and Syria, only ten years after 9/11, U.S. leaders betrayed every American who lost a loved one on September 11th by recruiting and arming Al Qaeda-led militants to overthrow two of the most secular governments in the Middle East, plunging both countries into years of intractable violence and fueling radicalization throughout the region.
The U.S. response to 9/11 was corrupted by a toxic soup of revenge, imperialist ambitions, war profiteering, systematic brainwashing and sheer stupidity. The only Republican Senator who voted against the war on Iraq, Lincoln Chafee, later wrote, “Helping a rogue president start an unnecessary war should be a career-ending lapse of judgment.”
But it wasn’t. Very few of the 263 Republicans or the 110 Democrats who voted for the Iraq war in 2002 paid any political price for their complicity in international aggression, which the judges at Nuremberg explicitly called “the supreme international crime.” One of them now sits at the apex of power in the White House.
Trump and Biden’s withdrawal and implicit acceptance of the U.S. defeat in Afghanistan could serve as an important step toward ending the violence and chaos their predecessors unleashed after the September 11th attack. But the current debate over next year’s military budget makes it clear that our deluded leaders are still dodging the obvious lessons of 20 years of war.
Barbara Lee, the only Member of Congress with the wisdom and courage to vote against Congress’s war resolution in 2001, has introduced a bill to cut U.S. military spending by almost half: $350 billion per year. With the miserable failure in Afghanistan, a war that will end up costing every U.S. citizen $20,000, one would think that Rep. Lee’s proposal would be eliciting tremendous support. But the White House, the Pentagon and the Armed Services Committees in the House and Senate are instead falling over each other to shovel even more money into the bottomless pit of the military budget.
Politicians’ votes on questions of war, peace and military spending are the most reliable test of their commitment to progressive values and the well-being of their constituents. You cannot call yourself a progressive or a champion of working people if you vote to appropriate more money for weapons and war than for healthcare, education, green jobs and fighting poverty.
These 20 years of war have revealed to Americans and the world that modern weapons and formidable military forces can only accomplish two things: kill and maim people; and destroy homes, infrastructure and entire cities. American promises to rebuild bombed-out cities and “remake” countries it has destroyed have proven worthless, as Biden has acknowledged.
Both Iraq and Afghanistan are turning primarily to China for the help they need to start rebuilding and developing economically from the ruin and devastation left by America and its allies. America destroys, China builds. The contrast could not be more stark or self-evident. No amount of Western propaganda can hide what the whole world can see.
But the different paths chosen by U.S. and Chinese leaders are not predestined, and despite the intellectual and moral bankruptcy of the U.S. corporate media, the American public has always been wiser and more committed to cooperative diplomacy than America’s political and executive class. It has been well-documented that many of the endless crises in U.S. foreign policy could have been avoided if America’s leaders had just listened to the public.
The perennial handicap that has dogged America’s diplomacy since World War II is precisely our investment in weapons and military forces, including nuclear weapons that threaten our very existence. It is trite but true to say that, ”when the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.”
Other countries don’t have the option of deploying overwhelming military force to confront international problems, so they have had to be smarter and more nimble in their diplomacy, and more prudent and selective in their more limited uses of military force.
The rote declarations of U.S. leaders that “all options are on the table” are a euphemism for precisely the “threat or use of force” that the U.N. Charter explicitly prohibits, and they stymie the U.S. development of expertise in nonviolent forms of conflict resolution. The bumbling and bombast of America’s leaders in international arenas stand in sharp contrast to the skillful diplomacy and clear language we often hear from top Russian, Chinese and Iranian diplomats, even when they are speaking in English, their second or third language.
By contrast, U.S. leaders rely on threats, coups, sanctions and war to project power around the world. They promise Americans that these coercive methods will maintain American “leadership” or dominance indefinitely into the future, as if that is America’s rightful place in the world: sitting atop the globe like a cowboy on a bucking bronco.
A “New American Century” and “Pax Americana” are Orwellian versions of Hitler’s “Thousand-Year Reich,” but are no more realistic. No empire has lasted forever, and there is historical evidence that even the most successful empires have a lifespan of no more than 250 years, by which time their rulers have enjoyed so much wealth and power that decadence and decline inevitably set in. This describes the United States today.
America’s economic dominance is waning. Its once productive economy has been gutted and financialized, and most countries in the world now do more trade with China and/or the European Union than with the United States. Where America’s military once kicked open doors for American capital to “follow the flag” and open up new markets, today’s U.S. war machine is just a bull in the global china shop, wielding purely destructive power.
But we are not condemned to passively follow the suicidal path of militarism and hostility. Biden’s withdrawal from Afghanistan could be a downpayment on a transition to a more peaceful post-imperial economy—if the American public starts to actively demand peace, diplomacy and disarmament and find ways to make our voices heard.
—We must get serious about demanding cuts in the Pentagon budget. None of our other problems will be solved as long as we keep allowing our leaders to flush the majority of federal discretionary spending down the same military toilet as the $2.26 trillion they wasted on the war in Afghanistan. We must oppose politicians who refuse to cut the Pentagon budget, regardless of which party they belong to and where they stand on other issues. CODEPINK is part of a new coalition to “Cut the Pentagon for the people, planet, peace and a future” – please join us!
—We must not let ourselves or our family members be recruited into the U.S. war machine. Instead, we must challenge our leaders’ absurd claims that the imperial forces deployed across the world to threaten other countries are somehow, by some convoluted logic, defending America. As a translator paraphrased Voltaire, “Whoever can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.”
—We must expose the ugly, destructive reality behind our country’s myths of “defending U.S. vital interests,” “humanitarian intervention,” “the war on terror” and the latest absurdity, the ill-defined “rules-based order” whose rules only apply to others—never to the United States.
—And we must oppose the corrupt power of the arms industry, including U.S. weapons sales to the world’s most repressive regimes and an unwinnable arms race that risks a potentially world-ending conflict with China and Russia.
Our only hope for the future is to abandon the futile quest for hegemony and instead commit to peace, cooperative diplomacy, international law and disarmament. After 20 years of war and militarism that has only left the world a more dangerous place and accelerated America’s decline, we must choose the path of peace.
Video: The Truth About Joe Biden and China – Why anti-China a must for both US political parties 關於喬拜登和中國的真相 – 為什麼反華是美國兩黨都必須要做才能生存 https://vimeo.com/601070925 https://youtu.be/7_rfnlMNjjw https://www.facebook.com/100036400039778/posts/563403644882965/?d=n Joe Biden has spent more time with China’s President Xi Jin Ping than any other world leader. In 2011 Joe Biden visited a local school in Beijing along with Xi Jin Ping. Biden’s message from 2011 is drastically different than his current message in 2021…what has changed? In today’s video I break down why Biden has changed his stance towards China and unfortunately gone down the same road as Donald Trump.
Thanks to M Teeth for sponsoring today’s video! Try their product here: https://amzn.to/3h4DuVb Make sure you use Coupon “30JANSSEN” for 30 % Discount
Video: Seattle will pass a law to decriminalize poor people to commit crimes, following California footsteps that robbery up to US$950 will not be prosecuted. Unlike China helping poors to get out of poverty, US weaponize poverty to prey on ordinary people putting Americans lives at risk. This is how US preaches their fake freedom democracy human rights and rules of laws to the world, leading by examples. 西雅圖將通過一項法律，將窮人的犯罪行為合法化，追隨加州的腳步，搶劫高達 950 美元將不會被起訴。 與中國幫助窮人脫貧不同，美國將貧困武器化以掠奪普通美國人才為生財之道，使美國人的生命處於危險之中。 美國就是這樣，以身作則，向世界宣揚假自由民主人權和法治. https://vimeo.com/600969457 https://youtu.be/qPdifvYseSY https://www.facebook.com/100036400039778/posts/563301484893181/?d=n
Johnson Choi Biz 