End the "Chinese Identity": Why Freedom Requires the Death of the CCP’s Invention

“Every time you call yourself ‘Chinese-American,’ you’re inadvertently carrying the CCP’s flag.”

The phrase “eliminate the Chinese people” sounds extreme—maybe even offensive at first glance. But what if I told you it’s not about race, ethnicity, or language—but about political identity, control, and liberation? What if it meant the end of a prison—and the beginning of a free future?

This article argues that to be truly free, especially as an immigrant in a democratic society, we must reject the CCP-manufactured identity of “Chinese”—and embrace a new, truthful identity that honors liberty, plurality, and the individual dignity God has given to all people.


1. “Chinese” Is Not an Ethnicity. It’s a Political Invention.

There is no such thing as a single “Chinese people.” There are Sichuanish, Cantonish, Hakka, Hokkien, Uyghurs, Tibetans, Mongols, and dozens more.

But the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has weaponized the concept of a singular “Chinese identity” to:

  • Erase regional and ethnic diversity

  • Control overseas diaspora through “Overseas Chinese Affairs Offices” and “United Front” networks

  • Claim global jurisdiction over people with Chinese heritage—even if they are American citizens

  • Justify surveillance, censorship, and political infiltration

When you call yourself “Chinese-American,” you are unwittingly accepting the CCP’s core ideological lie: that you belong to a singular, inseparable political entity called “China.”

This is no different than Soviet people calling themselves “Soviet-Americans,” even after the USSR collapsed.


2. Empires Collapse. Identities Evolve.

Let’s put this in historical context. You are not the first to undergo identity transition.

After the fall of the Roman Empire, there were no more “Romans”—there were French, English, Italians, and Germans.

After the Ottoman Empire collapsed, its subjects didn’t call themselves “Ottoman-Americans.” They became Turkish, Arab, Greek, or Balkan people.

After Austria-Hungary dissolved, its people stopped calling themselves “Austro-Hungarians.” They became Austrians, Hungarians, Czechs, Slovaks.

After the Qing dynasty was overthrown in 1911, the Manchu imperial identity disappeared. In its place, the Republic of China was born—at least temporarily.

And in 1776, when the American Revolution succeeded, former British colonial subjects stopped calling themselves British. They became something new: Americans.


3. You Can Be Born Again—Politically

In Christianity, to be “born again” means dying to the old self and receiving a new spirit in Christ.
Likewise, becoming an American citizen means dying to the identity the CCP imposed on you—and being born into liberty.

  • You are no longer a “Chinese person under foreign citizenship.”

  • You are an American with full rights, full protection, and full agency.

  • You are not obligated to the CCP’s myth of a “5,000-year-old civilization” or its fiction of “unbroken unity.”

  • You can choose a better identity.

Just as Christians reject the spiritual authority of the world, you can reject the political authority of Beijing.


4. Stop Calling Yourself “Chinese-American”

It’s time to discard the label that enables surveillance, compromise, and cultural guilt-tripping.

Instead, describe your real heritage:

  • I am a Sichuanish-American

  • I am a Cantonish-American

  • I am a Hokkien-American

  • I am a Hakka-American

  • I am a Luish-American

  • I am a Khitan-American

  • I am a Tibetan-American

  • I am a Yan-American

  • I am a Jin-American

Just like Irish-Americans, Polish-Americans, or Cuban-Americans, these labels reflect true historical and regional origins—not CCP propaganda.


5. Free People Don’t Belong to a Tyranny

We can no longer afford linguistic ambiguity. Every time a free person calls themselves “Chinese-American,” they risk:

  • ✅ Validating the CCP’s “One China” claim

  • ✅ Supporting CCP’s claim to represent overseas Chinese

  • ✅ Enabling United Front operations and infiltration

  • ✅ Denying their own historical roots

To fight tyranny, you must reject its language, its categories, and its illusions.


Conclusion: Let the Old Die. Let the Free Be Born.

It is not racist to say “we must eliminate the political identity of Chinese people.” It is liberation. It is truth. It is rebirth.

The identity of “Chinese” was created by an empire—and maintained by a dictatorship.
It is a prison. It is a lie. And it is time to end it.

You can be born again—not only in spirit, but in identity.

Let the “Chinese” die.
Let the free Americans of Sichuan, Hokkien, Canton, Lu, and Tibet rise.

Sichuanish is not Chinese.四川话不是中国话/汉语。四川人不是华人。 Sichuanish is not local dialect of Chinese 四川话不是中文/汉语的地方口音 #Religion #Christ #Minority #Freedom #Liberty #Sichuanish #Sichuanishnotlocaldialect #SichuanishnotChinese #少数族裔

终结“中国人”这一身份:自由的重生,从身份认同开始

“灭中国人”听上去可能极具争议,但如果我们深入理解这句话背后的自由逻辑与历史类比,就会明白它不仅不是种族主义的主张,反而是反奴役、反极权的正义要求,是人类文明解放的一部分。

我们主张的,不是生物意义上的“灭绝”,而是政治意义上的“解构”:终结“被中国共产党定义的中国人”这一政治身份,解放每一个个体,恢复自由的名字、真实的族群、多元的文化、独立的灵魂。

“中国人”是一种被极权政权制造的政治标签

今天的“Chinese”(中国人)这一身份,并非历史悠久的自然族群概念,而是近代以来,被清朝、中华民国、中华人民共和国先后接管并持续政治重构的标签。尤其是在1949年后,这一身份被中共武器化,用于:

  • 对内镇压少数族群、取消地方认同;

  • 对外组织华侨、统战各国;

  • 在美国推动所谓“和平统一促进会”、“华人协会”;

  • 掩盖中共间谍与第五纵队的行动轨迹。

当你自称“Chinese-American”,你就是被动承认了这一整套“中华民族共同体”的话语框架,而这正是极权的基础。

世界历史的经验:帝国的解体,身份的重构

你不是第一个面临“身份重建”的群体。世界历史早就经历过一次又一次“旧身份的终结与自由新人的诞生”:

  • 罗马帝国解体后,原先统一的“罗马人”身份不复存在,人们开始称自己为法国人、英国人、日耳曼人、意大利人等,欧洲多国逐步建立。

  • 奥斯曼帝国崩溃后,成千上万“奥斯曼人”消失了,取而代之的是土耳其人、希腊人、保加利亚人、阿拉伯人等现代民族。

  • 奥匈帝国崩溃后,过去的“奥匈臣民”消失,人民成为奥地利人、匈牙利人、捷克人、斯洛伐克人等自由公民。

  • 清帝国灭亡后,作为“满清奴才”的身份被中华民国所取代,人民首次成为“国民”。

  • 美国独立战争胜利后,原本的“英帝国殖民臣民”身份被丢弃,新的**美国公民(American Citizens)**诞生。

这不是“灭种”,而是“重生”!

当我们说要“终结中国人”身份时,正是要打破那个由专制政权强加的统一标签,就如同当年罗马、奥匈、清帝、英帝的臣民打破旧秩序一样。

新的自由身份:巴蜀人、闽南人、粤人、契丹人……

我们主张废弃“Chinese-American”“华裔美国人”这类模糊甚至为中共所用的身份标签,改用更真实的文化族群表述:

  • 我是川裔美国人(Sichuanish-American

  • 我是粤裔美国人(Cantonish-American

  • 我是闽南裔美国人(Hokkien-American

  • 我是客裔美国人(Hakka-American

  • 我是鲁裔美国人(Luish-American

  • 我是契丹裔美国人(Khitan-American

  • 我是燕裔美国人(Yan-American

  • 我是晋裔美国人(Jin-American

我们要用族群、语言、地理的真实背景,打破中共对“中华民族”这个伪概念的绑架。

信仰与身份的重生:如同基督教中的重生(Resurrection)

这个过程,就像基督信仰中所说的“重生”。你过去属世界、属罪,如今你属神。重生意味着放弃旧我、接纳新生命。

今天你在美国成为公民,也意味着放弃旧的政治奴役身份,接纳一个新的人格:拥有言论自由、信仰自由、司法保护与财产权。你不是“华人”,你是自由人。

你不再是中共的“代表对象”,你是美国宪法保护下的独立个体。你不能既要美国的自由,又保留中共的身份设计。

结语:自由从不从天而降,需靠你自己选择

我们可以选择像前苏联解体后的各国人民一样,告别统一的“苏维埃人”身份;也可以像清末的中国人那样,继续在中共的铁笼中争取“身份红利”,却永无自由。

每一次说“我是Chinese-American”,你就在亲手为自己的枷锁打磨边缘。

现在是时候,终结“中国人”的身份,迎接自由的新生。

Sichuanish is not Chinese.四川话不是中国话/汉语。四川人不是华人。 Sichuanish is not local dialect of Chinese 四川话不是中文/汉语的地方口音 #Religion #Christ #Minority #Freedom #Liberty #Sichuanish #Sichuanishnotlocaldialect #SichuanishnotChinese #少数族裔

Is Taiwan Becoming China's Backdoor to AI Power?

How the Chinese Communist Party Might Exploit Taiwan to Access GPT-Class Technologies—And What the U.S. and Allies Should Do About It

Introduction

In the ongoing race for artificial intelligence supremacy, few nations pose as complex a challenge as China. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has placed AI—including large language models (LLMs) like GPT—at the heart of its strategic development agenda. Yet, due to export controls, sanctions, and geopolitical friction, China is cut off from direct access to many of the world’s most advanced AI systems.

This is where Taiwan enters the equation.

While Taiwan is a democratic partner of the United States and home to critical industries like TSMC, it is also an open society—a place where Chinese interests often attempt to operate in the gray zone. That makes Taiwan a potential indirect channel through which Beijing can access or reverse-engineer cutting-edge AI models like ChatGPT.

This blog explores how the CCP might exploit Taiwan to gain access to GPT technologies and what democratic nations can do to prevent it.


🧭 Why Taiwan Is a Strategic Gateway for AI Technology

Taiwan’s vibrant developer community and widespread access to U.S.-based cloud services like Microsoft Azure and OpenAI’s API give its companies and individuals the ability to train, fine-tune, and deploy LLMs at scale—all in Chinese.

More importantly, Taiwan’s open internet, lack of a formal export-control treaty with the U.S., and deep integration into the international software supply chain make it highly vulnerable to covert exploitation.

Ways the CCP Could Leverage Taiwan:

  1. Talent Infiltration – Recruiting Taiwanese AI engineers through joint ventures or shell companies.

  2. API Misuse – Using Taiwanese accounts to access GPT models and stream data back to China.

  3. Corporate Collaboration – Partnering with pro-China businesses in Taiwan to fine-tune or clone open-source models.

  4. Academic Fronts – Exploiting Taiwan’s universities as neutral grounds to access research, tools, or partnerships.


🚨 The Risk: Technology Transfer by Proxy

The United States restricts direct AI model access from China for good reason: national security, human rights concerns, and the risk of military misuse.

But if Chinese entities can acquire model outputs, training data, inference strategies, or even proprietary fine-tuning routines through Taiwanese intermediaries, then these restrictions become meaningless.

Taiwan, unknowingly or not, risks becoming a strategic liability in the West’s AI containment efforts.


🛡️ What Needs to Be Done

To address this emerging risk, a multilayered strategy is required—one that spans technology, law, diplomacy, and supply chain monitoring.

1. API Access Control & Audit Trails

  • Require companies like OpenAI, Microsoft, and Anthropic to log and geo-fence API usage from Taiwan.

  • Flag anomalous access patterns involving high-volume Chinese-language queries.

  • Collaborate with Taiwan’s NCC and Digital Affairs Ministry to enforce these rules locally.

2. Tech Export Risk Assessments

  • Taiwan’s AI firms should be subject to a foreign-entity risk registry, similar to U.S. export controls.

  • Prohibit local firms from providing model access or deployment infrastructure to CCP-affiliated actors.

  • Vet joint ventures and research partnerships involving mainland or Hong Kong capital.

3. Talent Protection & Counterintelligence

  • Establish ethics training and national security clearance processes for AI engineers involved in sensitive model development.

  • Share U.S. intelligence with Taiwanese agencies to flag front organizations or espionage attempts.

  • Encourage universities to disclose and screen foreign funding in AI-related programs.

4. U.S.–Taiwan AI Security Accord

  • Propose a bilateral AI security framework as part of broader tech cooperation.

  • Include joint blacklists of organizations and IP addresses suspected of espionage or misuse.

  • Fund collaborative LLM research under secure, verifiable conditions.


🌏 This Is Not Just About Taiwan

This issue speaks to a broader truth: open societies are vulnerable to authoritarian exploitation.

If Taiwan, one of the freest and most tech-savvy democracies in Asia, can be used as a bridgehead by the CCP to access restricted AI technology, then no country is truly secure.

Preventing that outcome will require trust—but also transparency, audits, and teeth.


📝 Conclusion

Taiwan is a friend, a partner, and a vital node in the democratic tech ecosystem. But that status comes with responsibilities—not just for Taiwan, but for the U.S. and its allies.

It’s time we ensure that the tools of freedom don’t become weapons for tyranny—whether by design or by loophole.


💬 What do you think?

  • Have you observed suspicious tech activity in Taiwan’s AI space?

  • Are there specific companies, projects, or API behaviors that should be investigated?

Comment below or reach out securely.

台灣與以色列站在一起



台灣與以色列站在一起——是時候與台灣站在一起了。

多年來,尤其是自2023年10月7日以來,台灣不僅證明了自己是一個充滿活力、與以色列共享價值觀的民主國家,更是一個支持和協助以色列民眾的真正合作夥伴。

以色列議員進行了跨黨派合作,正式呼籲將台灣納入世界衛生組織、國際民航組織和聯合國氣候變遷綱要公約等重要國際組織。

這不僅僅是一個象徵性的姿態——它關乎價值觀、道德觀和全球夥伴關係。

台灣在創新、醫藥、醫療保健和環境領域貢獻、合作並引領潮流——即使它純粹出於政治原因被排除在主要國際機構之外,它仍然以負責任的態度和團結精神這樣做。

以色列議員很自豪,大多數以色列議會議員——總共72人——都加入了這項倡議。

現在,以色列的商業、學術和公共部門是時候與合適的盟友合作了。

How British Passports Became Tools of CCP Global Expansion

For decades, British citizenship was a symbol of democratic ideals—free speech, rule of law, and allegiance to a liberal democratic society. Today, that same passport is being wielded by loyal agents of an authoritarian regime that openly seeks to challenge and ultimately displace the global liberal order.

This is not hyperbole. It is a quiet, calculated campaign—and Britain’s own institutions have helped enable it.


🧱 BNO Status: A Trojan Horse?

The British National (Overseas) passport was offered to millions of Hong Kongers as a gesture of goodwill and refuge after the 1997 handover. Its intent was humanitarian. But Beijing’s United Front was quick to seize the opportunity.

While many genuine freedom-seekers relocated to the UK, embedded among them were Party loyalists—individuals still tied to the CCP’s security, propaganda, or economic arms. Some had ties to PLA-linked universities. Others had worked in state-owned enterprises involved in surveillance or censorship.

Worse, the UK made no serious attempt to screen for Party membership. BNO vetting focused on criminal records, not ideological allegiance. This opened a door that the CCP knew exactly how to exploit.


🏫 Student Visas and Party Loyalty

A vast number of CCP-affiliated individuals arrived not via BNO, but through university placements, joint research programmes, and tech industry recruitment. Some were graduates of institutions like the PLA’s National University of Defense Technology. Others had been trained by the United Front Work Department in overseas “influence work”.

Once inside the UK, many obtained residency and eventually British citizenship, all without ever renouncing CCP membership.

Let that sink in: a member of a foreign authoritarian ruling party—sworn to serve the Party above all—can hold a UK passport and vote in British elections.


🏛️ Citizenship Without Allegiance

British nationality law does not require applicants to formally renounce foreign political loyalties. In practice, a Communist Party member can swear an oath to the King, while remaining loyal to the CCP’s directives.

This loophole is now being weaponised.

CCP-linked individuals are now present across:

  • UK universities (student groups, Confucius Institutes)

  • Political lobbying outfits and think tanks

  • Chinese-language media serving diaspora communities

  • Tech firms with PRC joint ventures

  • UN and international agency appointments (via UK nationality)

From the inside, they influence narratives, monitor dissidents, and feed intelligence back to the Party. It’s infiltration by paper legitimacy.


🛰️ British Citizens, Beijing’s Agents

In 2020, a massive leak of nearly 2 million CCP member profiles exposed names working in consulates, multinational firms, and even British universities. Many of these individuals had overseas citizenship or residency—yet were still formally registered as Party cadres.

This is not unique to the UK. But the UK’s combination of lax political screening, elite naivety, and historic openness to China under Thatcher and Blair has made it particularly vulnerable.

The result? The British passport now functions as a cover identity for transnational authoritarian operatives.


🛡️ What Must Be Done

Britain must restore the integrity of its citizenship. This requires action at every level:

  • 🔍 Audit all naturalised citizens with ties to CCP organisations

  • Bar all current Party members from citizenship eligibility

  • 🧾 Mandate declaration of foreign political affiliations on visa/citizenship forms

  • Revoke citizenship if Party allegiance is discovered post-naturalisation

  • 📜 Strengthen laws on foreign political interference

This is not about ethnicity. It is about allegiance and political loyalty. The CCP has made it clear: no Chinese national—regardless of where they live—is ever truly free from “serving the Party”.

We must take them at their word—and act accordingly.

Weaponized Disclosure: How China's Audit Regulations Enable Surveillance, Censorship, and United Front Infiltration

Since 2011, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has implemented a deceptively bureaucratic regulation requiring all foreign accounting firms performing temporary audit work in mainland China to submit extensive disclosure forms. At first glance, these appear administrative—but closer inspection reveals a deeper strategy of control, surveillance, and influence projection.

Legal Cover for Surveillance

The regulatory basis is Notice [2011] No. 4 issued by China’s Ministry of Finance. It mandates that any overseas CPA firm seeking to conduct even temporary audit procedures inside China must apply for a Temporary Practice License. To obtain this license, the firm must disclose detailed, personal, and organizational information through four separate annexes:

  1. Application Form – Full names of the foreign firm, responsible officers, contact info, Chinese location, and audit timeframe.

  2. Client Disclosure Form – Names of overseas clients, their Chinese affiliates, physical addresses, nature of the corporate relationship, and exact dates of the audit.

  3. Personnel Identification Form – Names, genders, CPA license numbers, passport/ID info for all staff sent to China, including assistants.

  4. Post-Engagement Report – A full summary of what was done, where, when, and by whom—with signatures and seals.

This data is submitted not to an independent body, but directly to China’s Ministry of Finance, which is under the direct control of the Central Committee of the Communist Party.

Weaponized Transparency

While many countries regulate foreign auditors, China's approach goes far beyond reasonable oversight:

  • Cross-border ownership and control relationships must be declared in writing, creating a CCP database of global corporate structure.

  • Specific tasks (e.g., inventory counts, control testing, investment audits) must be described in detail—allowing Beijing to deduce internal risk areas.

  • The required post-engagement report mandates identifying all persons involved, which opens the door to retaliation, co-option, or further surveillance.

This level of exposure is not reciprocal. Chinese accounting firms operating abroad do not make similar declarations to the U.S. SEC or European regulators.

A Platform for Strategic Manipulation

This system gives the CCP tools to:

  • Censor or preempt negative findings before they reach foreign regulators or investors.

  • Identify whistleblowers or sensitive foreign employees—particularly those who may hold religious or political views deemed unacceptable.

  • Coordinate cover-ups of internal control failures, especially in industries sensitive to export controls, dual-use technologies, or foreign sanctions.

  • Target foreign accounting professionals for United Front influence efforts, including co-optation, flattery, or coercion.

Indeed, the CCP’s United Front Work Department has long sought to recruit foreign businesspeople, academics, and professionals into its orbit. By extracting detailed biographical and institutional data, the Ministry of Finance offers a foundation for expanding such influence operations abroad.

Risks to U.S. National Security

This regime also poses grave risks to Western national interests. For example:

  • Chinese subsidiaries of Intel, Tesla, or TikTok may hide technology transfers or cross-border payments that violate U.S. export laws.

  • Foreign CPA firms, compelled to submit client relationships and work scope, unintentionally enable dual-use tech evasion and PLA-affiliated audits.

  • U.S. firms operating in China cannot audit freely, while Beijing retains full audit visibility into American corporate structures and risk assessments.

It is a one-way mirror—America is seen, but cannot see.

Policy Implications

This disclosure regime warrants attention from:

  • National security agencies, for its role in facilitating tech transfer and influence operations.

  • Financial regulators, for creating environments where internal controls can be systematically bypassed or suppressed.

  • Legislators, who may need to restrict U.S. firms from entering audit arrangements that require surrendering protected client or personnel data to foreign authoritarian regimes.

Conclusion

What China calls "transparency" is in reality a highly-structured surveillance tool. Wrapped in the neutral language of accounting regulation, the 2011 rules for foreign CPA firms are part of a broader CCP doctrine: control the narrative, dominate the information flow, and subvert resistance through administrative means.

As Beijing expands this playbook across industries—law, media, academia—it becomes essential for Western institutions to treat even “accounting” as a domain of strategic competition.

Multilayered Sanctions Framework Against the Chinese Communist Party’s Religious Repression System

Target:
The Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) systematic suppression of religious freedom, including Bible censorship, state-controlled theology, persecution of underground churches, and information blackouts about international human rights law.


🧱 I. Individual-Level Sanctions (Magnitsky Act)

✅ Objective:

Impose personal accountability for human rights violations.

🎯 Targets:

  • Director and senior officials of the National Religious Affairs Administration

  • Head of the CCP United Front Work Department (UFWD)

  • Education Ministry officials overseeing “ideological and political education”

  • Public Security Bureau commanders involved in church crackdowns

  • Propaganda Department chiefs

🧾 Legal Grounds:

  • Magnitsky Act (Global) – for “gross violations of internationally recognized human rights”

  • UN Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief (1981)


🏢 II. Entity-Level Sanctions

✅ Objective:

Disable operational infrastructure used to implement religious persecution.

🧱 Institutional Targets:

  • National Religious Affairs Administration (国家宗教事务局)

  • Central Propaganda Department

  • Ministry of Education’s Ideological Steering Division

  • CCP United Front Work Department

  • Government-approved “Three-Self Patriotic Movement” & “China Christian Council”

🧾 Legal Justification:

  • Sanctions against government entities responsible for systemic abuse

  • Precedent: US sanctions on Xinjiang Public Security Bureau as an entire entity


🔍 III. Structural Attribution

✅ Objective:

Expose hidden command structures and prevent scapegoat replacement.

🎯 Target:

  • Party-level Religious Work Leading Groups

  • Ideological Steering Task Forces within the Politburo

  • Undeclared cross-agency planning organs involved in religious control

🧾 Supporting Argument:

  • These “shadow” bodies evade formal responsibility while directing illegal policies.

  • Based on Nuremberg precedent, propaganda and education ministries were punished for preparing aggressive war via ideological indoctrination (IMT Vol I, pp. 186–187).


📡 IV. Information and Technology-Based Sanctions

✅ Objective:

Counter China's abuse of digital platforms to suppress religious truth and amplify regime propaganda.

🎯 Targets:

  • AI surveillance tools used to track religious behavior

  • Platforms and censors blocking access to digital Bibles and international law materials

  • China-funded social media narratives promoting atheism or state-theology

🧾 Reference:

  • UN General Assembly Resolution 176(II) and 177(II) – duty to educate public on international law and UN principles

  • Blocking this constitutes preparation for illegal war by obscuring legal standards


🌍 V. International Coordination Mechanism

✅ Objective:

Prevent sanction evasion by shifting personnel or operations across borders.

✅ Proposal:

  • G7-led Magnitsky coordination task force

  • Include CCP religious repression in UN Special Rapporteur reports

  • Call on UNESCO to suspend China's membership for violating cultural and religious rights


⚖️ VI. Elevation to Crimes Against Humanity

✅ Objective:

Recognize scale and persistence as not isolated incidents, but structural atrocity.

Legal Route:

  • Frame state-wide suppression of religious freedom as:

    • “Persecution” (Rome Statute, Art. 7.1.h)

    • “Other inhumane acts” causing great suffering (Art. 7.1.k)

    • Preparatory act to crimes of aggression, via mass psychological manipulation and denial of international law access


🔚 Conclusion:

Targeted sanctions alone are not enough.
Only structural exposure, transnational coordination, and legal escalation can stop the CCP’s weaponization of religious persecution and educational censorship.

This campaign is not just about defending Chinese Christians—it is about protecting international law, truth, and civilization from ideological warfare.

川普为泰柬停火而努力



川普的帖子:“我刚刚与柬埔寨总理进行了一次非常愉快的通话,并向他通报了我与泰国及其代理总理的讨论情况。双方都希望立即实现停火与和平。他们也希望与美国重回“贸易谈判桌”,但我们认为,在战争停止之前,这样做是不合适的。他们已同意立即会晤,并迅速达成停火协议,最终实现和平!我很荣幸能与这两个国家打交道。他们有着悠久而辉煌的历史和文化。希望他们能够在未来的许多年里和睦相处。当一切尘埃落定,和平即将到来时,我期待着与这两个国家签署贸易协定!”

国际人权法案



通过国际人权法案的联合国大会会议记录。原始链接:https://docs.un.org/zh/A/PV.183



国际人权法案的内容:世界人权宣言 原文。 原始链接:https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/666853?ln=en&v=pdf
中华民国1948年12月11日通过,自通过之日起就对全中国有效,任何违反行为都应被移交国际法庭处理。
违反国际人权法案的行为可能被国际法庭依据纽伦堡宪章第六条裁定构成反人类罪。联合国大会决议认定纽伦堡宪章第六条为生效国际法的链接:https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/209872?v=pdf 具体被联合国认定的纽伦堡宪章第六条的国际法链接:https://legal.un.org/ilc/documentation/english/a_cn4_22.pdf 相关联合国大会决议







对“克强经济学”的系统性批判

“克强经济学”不过是极权体制下的一次技术性调整,其名义上的“市场改革”既无制度根基、也无思想支撑,更遑论走向真正自由。奥地利经济学派对其做出如下批判:


一、克强经济学不是市场经济,是“温和干预主义”的包装

李克强所谓“简政放权”、“让市场发挥决定性作用”,听起来好像是自由改革,实则不过是**“更聪明的计划经济”**——它依然坚守中共绝对权威,只是试图减少效率损失以延长统治寿命。

  • 权力不下放,只是分工“更科学”

  • 放权是“权宜之计”,收权从未停止(例如环保、金融、户籍改革都在同时强化政府控制);

  • 所谓市场机制不过是“更聪明的调控工具”,用于实现党的目标,而非还政于民。

奥派早已指出,任何中间道路的干预主义最终都将走向更深的集权(米塞斯《干预主义批判》)。


二、克强指数并不反映市场,而是政权对数据的虚假修复

李克强推崇电量、货运、贷款数据,似乎在“回归真实”,实际上只是一种更精致的统计手段,并未改变政权操纵数据的本质。

  • 电力和贷款同样受政府主导调度,不是真实市场信号

  • 李克强指数没有纳入价格、利率、产权等关键信息

  • 他承认GDP造假,却依然参与虚假数据发布,未曾披露真相

奥地利学派强调价格机制是自由经济的灵魂,而李克强对价格信号的理解几近于零,继续维持被中央命令扭曲的利率与资产结构


三、克强所谓“创业”是制度陷阱,不是自由创新

“大众创业、万众创新”被包装为开放与希望,实则是国家为维稳输出就业压力的临时缓冲手段,是政权用来分散不满情绪的“新瓶装旧酒”。

  • 没有私有产权保障,创业成果随时被强拆、清算、没收

  • 平台经济虽由市场发起,却被监管铁拳瞬间毁灭(滴滴、蚂蚁、教育)

  • “双创”本质是让人民自担风险、党来收割红利

在奥派视角,创新必须基于产权自由、法治安全与资本形成,而非依附权贵、靠审批生存的“伪创业”。


四、克强所谓“放权”,没有真正放弃国家对货币、土地与资本的控制

李克强任内,中国的货币发行、信用膨胀、土地财政依然由国家主导:

  • 人民币仍由政治控制的央行发行,利率价格全由国家设定;

  • 土地所有权依旧归国家,“市场”只是买卖使用权;

  • 银行贷款仍集中于国企、地方政府平台,扭曲资源配置。

这一切与自由市场毫无关系。奥派早已指出,没有健全货币制度、没有私有产权、没有破产机制,就不存在市场经济


五、李克强“现实主义”,不过是为极权续命的技术理性

李克强是聪明的奴仆,而不是自由的改革者。他并未挑战中共政权的合法性,更未质疑其垄断结构。他的所谓“理性”,只是为了帮助党更有效地管理奴隶,而非让奴隶成为自由人。

  • 他没有任何制度性反抗,没有鼓励言论自由、司法独立、政治开放;

  • 他没有给出任何未来自由社会的路线图;

  • 他没有站在人民一边,只是代表体制中的“温和管理层”。

这与真正的改革毫无关系,只是为暴政化妆的掩饰术。


🧨 结论:克强经济学是“更有效率的暴政工具”,而不是走向自由的桥梁

奥地利经济学派坚定认为:

在极权制度内,所谓的‘温和改革派’不过是暴政的润滑剂。
市场不是政权恩赐,而是自由人民的自然秩序。

因此,不应寄希望于李克强们,不应幻想中共会“自我纠偏”,不应把“温家宝化”当成市场改革的起点。只要共产党在台上,任何“经济学”都是为其服务的工具,无论名字多么温和、口号多么专业。

Sichuanish is not Chinese.四川话不是中国话/汉语。四川人不是华人。 Sichuanish is not local dialect of Chinese 四川话不是中文/汉语的地方口音 #Religion #Christ #Minority #Freedom #Liberty #Sichuanish #Sichuanishnotlocaldialect #SichuanishnotChinese #少数族裔

中国基本上就是一个毒贩,而全世界已经对中国商品上了瘾。我们必须与中国脱钩

糯米团翻译的美国听证会现场信息:中国和他们的商品,中国本质上就是个毒贩,而全世界则对中国产品上瘾。当中国想要惩罚谁时,它只需要断供这些“毒品”。而你要摆脱这种依赖,唯一的办法就是自我“康复”。

Personal Declaration of Independence

When a person, long subjected to tyranny, decides to sever all ties with an illegitimate power and reclaim the dignity and liberty endowed by the Creator, a decent respect to the opinions of humankind requires that the causes which impel them to separation be declared.

We hold these truths to be self-evident:
that all men are created equal;
that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights;
that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Justice.

To secure these rights, governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed.
Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to refuse its authority, dismantle its institutions, and to establish a new foundation for their security and freedom.

Therefore, I, a citizen of China and a Certified Public Accountant officially registered under the current regime of the People’s Republic of China, do solemnly declare the following:


I. Rejection of the Regime’s Legitimacy

I do not recognize the legitimacy of the so-called “People’s Republic of China.”
Since 1949, this regime has usurped national sovereignty without the consent of the people, has never conducted a free election, and has never been vested with moral or legal authority.
Its continued existence violates the principles of constitutionalism, human rights, and the national will.


II. Denial of All Governing Authority

I do not recognize the Chinese Communist Party’s right to levy taxes, enact laws, enforce regulations, or exercise judicial authority over me or the people of China.
All of its institutions are, in my view, unlawful organs of tyranny and coercion, not expressions of justice or national sovereignty.


III. Refusal of Representation

I refuse to be represented by the Chinese Communist Party or any of its controlled organs in any international organization, diplomatic proceeding, or political discourse.
This regime does not speak for China, does not speak for Chinese civilization, and certainly does not speak for me.


IV. Affirmation of Universal Values

I firmly uphold the universal values of liberty, democracy, rule of law, freedom of religion, and freedom of expression.
I identify with and support the modern global order founded upon these values—particularly as embodied by the United States of America.


V. Declaration of Hostile Nature

I affirm that the Chinese Communist Party constitutes an authoritarian system of organized violence against its own people and a clear and present danger to global civilization.
Its actions meet the legal and moral standards of crimes against humanity, cultural genocide, and terrorism.
I call upon all nations to formally designate the Chinese Communist Party as a terrorist organization and enemy of mankind.


VI. Commitment to Justice

I hereby pledge to support efforts to document, expose, and prosecute the Chinese Communist Party’s historical and ongoing crimes.
I am willing to testify, provide evidence, and support international legal, economic, and moral actions until this organization is fully dismantled and the Chinese people are free.


VII. Rebuilding Identity on Truth

My political identity, cultural belonging, legal allegiance, and spiritual dignity are no longer subject to the apparatus of the Chinese Communist regime.
I now base my identity upon truth, freedom, faith, and the shared heritage of mankind—not the fabricated ideologies of a criminal political organization.


This declaration is made in the spirit of the Declaration of Independence of the United States of America (1776), and shall stand as a permanent testimony of my conscience, my liberty, and my solemn contract with God and with history.

Signed: CPA Jim 

中共国黑客网络攻击美国核安全机构

 据福克斯报道,美国能源部周三向福克斯新闻数字频道证实 ,美国国家核安全局 (NNSA) 遭遇了一次大规模网络攻击,攻击方式是通过微软的 Sharepoint 文档软件。

目前该机构尚未发现任何敏感或机密信息被窃取。 

美国能源部 (DoE) 向福克斯新闻数字频道表示:“7 月 18 日星期五,微软 SharePoint 零日漏洞开始影响美国能源部,包括美国国家核安全局 (NNSA)。”该部门负责维护和设计美国核武器库。 


微软警告称,受中国政府支持的黑客正在利用全球各地机构 SharePoint 软件中的漏洞。总部位于荷兰的 Eye Security 公司 向路透社透露,此次漏洞目前已造成 400 人受害。 

参与此次黑客攻击的两个受中共支持的团体 Linen Typhoon 和 Violet Typhoon 利用了文档共享软件中的漏洞,这些漏洞存在于那些在自己的网络而不是通过微软的云软件运行该软件的客户身上。 

但能源部表示,它主要利用云计算,因此只有“极少数系统受到影响”。 


微软称其 SharePoint 系统遭到与中国政府相关的黑客攻击。 

据微软称,另一个位于中国的黑客组织 Storm-2603 也利用了这些漏洞。 

周三,当被问及此次黑客攻击事件时,中国外交部发言人郭家坤表示,他不清楚具体情况,但表示:“中方坚决反对并依法打击黑客活动。同时,我们也反对任何借网络安全问题对中国进行抹黑和攻击。”谷歌旗下网络安全咨询集团 Mandiant 的技术主管查尔斯·卡马卡尔 (Charles Carmakal) 周一在 LinkedIn 帖子中证实,参与此次黑客攻击的组织中至少有一个是“与中国有联系的威胁行为者”。

美财政部长对解决中共已经给出时间表










华语区,只有在路德社,你才能清晰的了解地缘政治局势!





COVID-19新冠病毒、武汉肺炎病毒、武汉SARS病毒同时具备“功能增强”的五个特征 🔸曹务春 解放军疾病预防控制中心 曹务春的理论 把旧的和传统的生物武器改造“功能增强” 1️⃣实现跨物种传播 可传人 2️⃣更具传播性 感染性 3️⃣更危险 更致命 4️⃣难以被检测 识别为生物武器 5️⃣病毒可以逃逸人类免疫

抗战时期的真实四川与美军合作,不与中共合流



抗战是东亚地区近代最重要的战略决战。四川,作为中华民国的抗战大后方,不仅提供了庞大的兵力,更凭借显著的作战能力成为战场上一支关键力量。同时,美军在太平洋战场的决策性空中打击对日本侵略者造成了实质性破坏,影响了战争走向。四川人民与美军的密切配合,是这场反法西斯战争取得胜利的重要组成部分。

一、川军的作战贡献与效率

抗战期间,四川军队在多场关键战役中表现出色。根据史料记载,数百万川军参与了淞沪、长沙、缅北等主要战场的作战,展现了高效的战斗力和坚韧的战斗意志。四川军队在长沙会战及衡阳保卫战中的有效抵抗,为整个战局赢得了宝贵时间和战略缓冲。

二、陪都重庆:美军在华的重要作战基地

重庆作为抗战陪都,是盟军反法西斯战线的战略枢纽。美军在重庆设立了第14航空队(即飞虎队)司令部、驻华美军情报机构(OSS)以及关键的后勤补给和通信指挥中心。四川人民为美军提供了必要的后勤支持、情报配合和地面协助,共同保障了盟军在华作战的效率和战果。飞虎队与“驼峰航线”的成功运作,直接助力盟军对日空中优势的建立和维持。

三、中共逃避日军与美国打击日军的区别

与四川人民与盟军密切配合有效打击日军形成鲜明对比的是,中共在延安实施“保存实力”战略,避免与日军进行大规模正面冲突。据相关军事档案和研究,直到1940年,八路军的大部分主力尚未与日军发生广泛激烈战斗。中共更多地采取游击战术和战略避战,重点在于扩大自身影响力和控制区域。

四、战后历史叙述的差异

战后,中共逐步重塑抗战叙事,突出其领导地位,淡化四川及美军的贡献。重庆作为国际盟军基地的历史地位被弱化,飞虎队和川军的协作经历也被忽视或边缘化。四川军人及其历史作用未能被充分认可,相关记忆被局限于官方统一的叙述框架中。

五、结语:真实的四川,不容遗忘

今天的中国,官方只讲“全国一盘棋”、只讲“人民战争”,却不讲是谁真正站在战场最前线,不讲是谁在与盟军并肩、不讲是谁在保存实力、坐待夺权。

真实的四川,是与世界合作、与正义同行、与美军并肩、以血抗战的四川。

这段历史,理应归还给四川人民。

这段历史,也提醒我们:中共所宣称的“抗战合法性”,并不能代表所有四川人的选择,更不能抹去那些为自由而战的真实牺牲。

五、还原真实的历史

四川人民与美军的合作,展现了东亚人民为反抗日本侵略所作出的有效军事贡献。真实的抗战历史应当基于实证材料,尊重各方作战效能和牺牲,而非被单一政治力量的叙事所掩盖。理解这段历史,有助于我们全面认识那段复杂而关键的时期,也有助于铭记所有为和平与自由而战的人民。

六、用成本管理的思路看抗战真相

在成本管理中,企业的目标是“用最小的资源投入,获得最大的产出”,强调减少浪费和无效成本,实现最高效益。同样地,战争的价值不在于死伤数字有多大,而在于以最小的代价,打击敌人最大的战略利益,并最终让侵略者承担应有的责任。

然而,中共抗战叙述常常只强调“牺牲有多大”,用高昂的人力成本来证明“伟大”,却忽视了抗战真正的关键因素:比如美国对日投下的原子弹——这是一场用最少时间和资源迅速结束战争、逼迫日本无条件投降的战略高效行为,却在官方叙述中被刻意淡化。

同样,爱因斯坦作为科学家的国际身份和对核武器项目的间接贡献,以及曼哈顿计划带来的军事科技优势,也几乎被忽略。

更具讽刺意味的是,战后中共并没有依靠单纯“牺牲”,而是通过“技术窃取”和“人才引进”,迅速掌握了核武器技术,追求用现代科技武器改变战略力量对比。这种策略体现了成本管理中的“资源最大化利用”,而非盲目消耗人力。

因此,理解抗战胜利,应当超越单纯的“牺牲”叙事,从效率和战略效果的角度看,才能真正明白历史的复杂与全貌。

中共可能宣称,其“敌后抗战”通过与日军“和平共处”,以最低成本保存实力,最终取得政权,是一种“成本最低化”的战略胜利。

但从成本管理的视角看,中共所谓的“低成本夺权”不过是表面数字的游戏,背后付出了更惨痛的隐形代价:

首先,是牺牲了东亚大陆绝大多数人民的自由和尊严。中共夺权后实行长期高压统治,严厉限制思想、言论和行动自由,造成数千万人的深重苦难和巨大的社会资源浪费。

其次,中共根本没有真正击败外敌。日本最终被美军的核武器强迫投降,国军虽然存在缺陷,却始终是抗战主力。中共靠内战夺权,导致中国陷入更长时间的内耗和分裂,战后还放弃了日本侵华战争应承担的赔偿责任。

内战带来的社会经济成本,远远超过中共自诩“敌后抗战”所节约的那点资源。

因此,中共“最低成本夺权”的论调彻底忽视了战争和政权更深层次的真正代价——对人民的压迫,对社会的摧残,以及对国家未来的长期负担。

中共应为其在日本侵华战争中的共犯身份,以及战后持续制造的反人类罪、战争罪和侵略罪,承担全部历史责任和法律后果!

Ad1