Mysteries behind US’ UNC labs, Fort Detrick, ‘Coronavirus Hunter’ and virus origins by Xu Zihe Aug 25 2021

Professor Ling-chi Wang of UC Berkeley: Hi, Julie: Johnson is right. So is John. The worst is yet to come. If the DOJ were to apply the same criteria it used on Sing Tao, the World Journal (世界日报) should likewise receive the same treatment because it is a propaganda mouthpiece for the Taiwan government since the DPP seized control of the government. I believe the Chinese Press (桥报), the third Chinese-language newspaper in the U.S.,has long been subjected to the same treatment Sing Tao now gets from the U.S. government.

In the early 1950s, Chung Sai (中西日报), was forced to close because its new owner was suspected of being pro-PRC. The Gold Gate Daily (金门日报), an openly pro-PRC paper, printed in red rather than black ink, was shut down within weeks. The most celebrated case was the China Daily News (华侨日报), owned by members of the Chinese Hand Laundry Association (CHLA), a business organization made up of owners of hundreds of Chinese hand laundrymen across New York City. The paper celebrated the founding of the PRC and reported news of New China. The paper steadfastly resisted government repression and continued publication until the 1990s. Both the publisher and editor were prosecuted and convicted by some ridiculous charges, too complicated to explain in this email. They both served time. Subscribers of the paper across the U.S. were investigated investigated and intimidated by the FBI and newspaper stands in Chinatowns refused to carry the paper. By 1960s, the paper, operated on shoe-strings, was was able to print only twice a week and in two sheets and had only about 200 die-hard supporters.

Since Sing Tao also runs a Chinese-language radio programs, I am sure the license-holder of the radio station will be pressured to drop its Chinese programming or face the revocation of its FCC license. I would not be surprised if the staff are already subject to HLS and IRS investigations, a standard government tool of harassment and intimidation.

The 90,000 foreign agents, foreign governments collaborators and Western moon lover left HK has created opportunities for patriotic expats to return. 90,000名外國代理人、外國政府合作者和西方月亮崇拜者離開香港為愛國香港國外居民創造了返回的機會.

Video: How US Government takes care of Americans in Afghanistan as compared to China could see the difference between US’s money democracy verses China’s people democracy. China has evacuated all her citizens on July 29 2021. The video here give you more examples. 與中國相比，美國政府如何照顧阿富汗的美國人可以看出美國的金錢民主與中國的人民民主之間的區別。 中國已於 2021 年 7 月 29 日撤離所有公民。這裡的視頻為您提供了更多示例.
https://youtu.be/sYLR6oOONDI
https://vimeo.com/592365028
https://www.facebook.com/100036400039778/posts/554327359123927/?d=n

US Vice-President Kamala Harris selling China containment to Vietnam during the visit said Vietnam can trust US, failed to mention US got defeated badly in Afghanistan, abandoned US allies and friends, left in a hurry. She also failed to mention chemical warfare (Agent Orange) being used during the Vietnam War left millions of Vietnamese disabled still living in pain today. 美國副總統卡瑪拉·哈里斯訪問期間向越南兜售中國遏制政策，稱越南可以信任美國，卻沒有提到美國在阿富汗慘敗，拋棄美國盟友和朋友，匆匆離去。 在越南戰爭期間，她也沒有提到化學戰導致數百萬越南人今天仍然生活在痛苦中. World Journal Newspaper San Francisco on August 25 2021 美國加州舊金山世界日報.

A slap at US face before it’s VP visit selling China containment – Vietnamese Prime Minister Pham Minh Chinh told China his country would not enter an alliance to confront Beijing, before he met US Vice-President Kamala Harris on Wednesday. 在副總統訪問中國之前，給美國一記耳光 – 越南總理在周三會見美國副總統卡馬拉哈里斯之前告訴中國，他的國家不會結盟對抗北京.

Video: US’s China containment fantasy to stop China rise by all means at all cost 美國用任何方式遏制中國掘起的幻想不會成功.
https://vimeo.com/591666267
https://youtu.be/gEUVFFCSE0M
https://www.facebook.com/100036400039778/posts/553586209198042/?d=n

China Peaceful Unification Western America USA change of Officers and Directors attended by Chinese Consul General in San Francisco – Singtao Newspaper San Francisco – August 23 2021

美國加州舊金山星島日報： 美西和統會張靜靜任會長 繼續團結反獨促統做貢獻2021-08-23

美西和統會舉行會長交接，中領館副總領事鄒永紅（中）監交，卸任會長吳有義（左）將印信交給新任會長張靜靜（右）。記者王慶偉攝

美西和統會會長交接，全體來賓合影留念。記者王慶偉攝 (本報記者王慶偉聖他克拉報道)

美西中國和平統一促進會（簡稱美西和統會）22日舉行第七屆會長交接儀式暨新形勢下兩岸關係研討會，駐舊金山中國總領事館副總領事鄒永紅出席參加，主持監交。卸任會長吳有義將印信交給新任會長張靜靜。吳有義出任理事長。灣區多個同鄉會、社團代表出席，包括河北商會、山東同鄉會、五湖四海聯合會、硅谷河南商會、硅谷女性聯合會、灣區美女會等。
鄒永紅代表中領館向和統會表示祝賀及問候。她表示還記得兩年前，美西和統會在大家共同努力和僑團的支持下，在三藩巿成功舉辦「海峽兩岸高峰論壇暨全美和統會年會」，反嚮熱烈，影響廣泛，成效顯著；體現海外統促組織團結合作，心繫祖國，情繫統一大業的情懷和努力。她希望美西和統會新一屆成員，接續前行，在灣區乃至全美反獨促統中，作出更大貢獻。
新任會長張靜靜致詞時表示，感謝美西和統會對她的支持，出任會長感到責任重大。「美西和統會成立以來，在歷任的會長帶領下，對促進祖國的和平統一，作出積極的貢獻，已成為海外在反獨促統上一個重要的力量。新一屆的理事會在過去的基礎上更加努力，探討新的思路、新的任務，團結一切可以團結的力量，堅定信念，為祖國的和平統一，作出新的貢獻。」卸任會長、新任理事長吳有義表示，美西和統會成立12年以來，團結灣區僑胞，堅持反獨促統，開展各項活動，為促進祖國的和平統一作出積極的貢獻。他指出，2020年年初中國國內爆發新冠疫情，美西和統會和江蘇同鄉會、河北商會、湖北同鄉會為國內同胞設立專款專戶捐贈防疫物資。美國爆發疫情後，也結合各商會、同鄉會，向有關單位、醫院捐贈抗疫物資，為美國的抗疫作出貢獻。

In the 60-70s how sex predators in HK using goldfish as bates to lure young girls to have sex. In the 21st century, US adopted HK goldfish sex predators tactics luring countries. We are afraid these countries will ends up like the young girls in HK. Look at what has happened to Afghanistan! 在 60-70 年代，香港的性掠奪者如何引誘年輕女孩發生性行為. 21世紀, 美國採用香港金魚性掠奪者策略引誘各國. 我們擔心這些國家最終會像香港的年輕女孩一樣. 看看阿富汗發生了什麼 – 就像那些可憐的香港無知少女一樣!

Let me share with you the inquiry by a rich Chinese friend considering to send her daughter to attend Stanford University or UC Berkeley and the suggestions I have just provided to him.

我和你分享我剛剛回答一位中國有錢朋友的女兒想來美國讀書的問題.

Stanford 大學用關係入校機會極微, 要靠實力. 已經有人要用關係給錢被判刑. 另一可能是捐款, 但Stanford 錢太多, 除非是捐千萬美元否則也不用想. 我有不小中國朋友孩子進入名校但讀一些沒用的本科. 當然如果是富二代, 那個學位祇是用來出出風頭, 這些人多的是來到美國天天吸毒, 交交男女朋友, party 等等, 十年也不畢業, 也不回國的職業學生.

UC Berkeley 是州立大學, 走後門的機會不大.

今天美國那麼仇中, 來美國風險高. 那天時運不濟, 分分鐘沒命.

美國現在快速走下坡, 萬一你女兒定居美國, 你不擔心你的女兒也要擔心你的孫子的將來, 沒有將來!

今天美國已經不是二十年前的美國, 外強中乾. 當美元不再是世界貨幣是, 就是美國走向死亡像羅馬帝國的開始. 最快15年, 最慢30年內發生. 到時你女兒是48歲吧. 到時她回國也無門.

你要三思，再三思.

Stanford University has very little chance of entering the school by relationship, and it depends on student academic standing and other non-academic requirements. Some people have already been sentenced to jail for using illegal relationship and bribery. Another possibility is donation, but Stanford has too much money, unless it is a donation of ten millions or more, otherwise you don’t have to think about it. I have a lot of China Friends’ children enter prestigious schools but do some useless undergraduate studies. Of course, if they are a rich second-generation, that degree is just for showing off. Many of these people come to the United States to take illegal drugs every day, make boyfriend and girlfriend and parties, etc. They don’t even graduate for ten years. These professional students never graduate and don’t want to return to China.

UC Berkeley is a state university, so there is little chance of going through the back door.

Today the United States is so anti-Asians especially Chinese, the risk of living dangerously in the United States is high.

U.S. is rapidly going downhill. In case your daughter settles in the U.S., if you don’t worry about your daughter, but you need to worry about the future of your grandkids, there is little future for them!

Today the United States has not been the United States twenty years ago. It only looks strong from the outside. When the US dollar is no longer the world currency, it is the beginning of the steep decline of the United States like the Roman Empire. It will happen in 15 years at the earliest and 30 years at the latest. By then, your daughter will be 48 years old. She will be stuck. There will be no way for her to return to China.

You have to think twice, think twice.

Professor Ling-chi Wang of UC Berkeley: Hi, Johnson: Since some of the newly rich and inexperienced celebrities got caught trying to buy or game their ways into the better universities and colleges a few years ago, universities, both private and public, are more cautious and discreet in the ways they admit students from the rich, famous, and powerful families. Since Harvard, the very first college in North America, was founded in 1636. the game has always been and will continue to be in favor of the rich, famous, and powerful because that was how the system was built: to clone and reproduce themselves. To be sure, they will continue to admit outstanding students who will make important scientific discoveries and outstanding intellectual breakthroughs and help gain reputation for these institutions. But, these will be exceptions. The vast majority of students will continue to be the privileged ones from the rich, famous, and the powerful.

Aboishing the SAT tests will neither help achieve greater equality nor select “better qualified” students. For more than one hundred years, contrary to popular beliefs SAT tests were not used to help select better qualified applicants. Instead, they were used to turn away students from the poor and the working class and students deemed incapable of making contributions to the institutions. Universities know SAT tests are race and class bias and above all, they don’t help pick the best students. But, they are the most expedient and efficient schemes to justify rejection of thousands of students each year.

The admission scandals in the last few years exposed the corruption and unfairness in the meritocracy used by universities and colleges. It was embarrassing, but they did nothing to move the universities away from the use of biased criteria and procedures of admission to reproduce themselves. For example, legacy and athletic, the two larges cohorts admitted in the freshman class each year, remain unchanged and may even be expanding because both are important for generating revenues for the universities.

In short, don’t expect Stanford and Berkeley to rollback their commitment to these two revenue-generating schemes and the class and race bias built into these two programs.

Frank Mah in San Francisco: Hi, Johnson, Ling-chi, If the child of your friend has an interest to attend Stanford or Cal Berkeley, he or she should apply. Both universities are outstanding and can offer a quality education that few other universities can match. I had the opportunity to work for both universities and learned to compare the educational philosophy of both schools. Stanford is a top-down university with a strong administration. UC Berkeley is a relatively flat university with strong academic departments; their students are ultra competitive and keen to compete with their peers. Stanford views that getting a top quality education is only half of its objective. The other half is its residential education program, Stanford students tend to be more collegial, seeking to form friendships globally for life. Important to note that these are generalizations, as there are exceptions.

Currently AAPI students make up 34% of Berkeley’s student body. Around 27% for Stanford. The former is a more hostile campus due to the competitiveness of its students. Both universities seek to diversity its student body. Both seek to integrate its campuses, matching students base on what they can contribute to campus life. Less then 15% of Stanford’s student body can be deemed geniuses, but over 95% must meet high standards for admission. Donors and legacies, i.e., children of alumni, staff employees, and billionaires can make up 15-20% of its student body. Other factors include geographic location, i.e., urban vs rural; domestic vs foreign. These factors offers to make a rich environment for its students. More significantly, it’s the students aptitude to complete four years of high quality study in their respective field, which is what academics is all about. If a student wants to party, they should consider another school. It is a factor for Stanford to seek students from potential donors and rich families abroad. It’s also is a factor for them to consider legacies of important leaders, personalities, etc. to enrich the student campus experience. Imagine a poor farm boy/girl from Iowa hobnobbing with Madonna’s child, or a billionaires child from Burma. Of course, most people, for one reason or another, will consider this unfair. In the past, test scores and GPA were found to be reliable due to race, family income, and education; this has now been eliminated or reduced in weighing a student’s application compared to other significant factors, such as skills, accomplishments, leadership, diversity etc.

Chances are that your friend’s child will not make it into either school due to the vast number off applications it receives. I often will counsel family and friends on the admissions process and also help steer them to also seek alternatives that may better fit the academic objectives/aspirations of the student. Sometimes a local community college is a better fit for a student with low grades or lacking vision of his or her aspirations. Sometimes a school like Cal Tech or may offer a better choice for those who are research oriented in a particular field. It’s a little known fact that only half of college students complete their course of study w/o graduating. When I was matriculating at San Jose State University, I also had the opportunity to be an EOP (Educational Opportunity Program) Recruiter seeking educationally & economically disadvantaged students for college study.