Tienanmen Square Dissident Fears More Bloodshed In China

FILE - Students demonstrators scuffle with police as they try to break the guard line to march to the Tiananmen Square in Beijing, April 27, 1989. 

Ralph Jennings

May 30, 2014 1:59 AM

TAIPEI — Next month marks the 25th anniversary of a bloody crackdown on dissent in Beijing. China is unlikely to acknowledge the incident on June 4, 1989, which left hundreds or more dead around Beijing’s Tiananmen Square. But survivors of the student democracy movement have hardly forgotten.

One protest leader, Wu’er Kaixi, lives in exile in Taipei, where he works in finance. The 46-year-old ethnic Uighur, who was born in Beijing, fears China has changed little. He said the country may face more bloodshed as people get fed up with domestic problems such as corruption. He spoke to Ralph Jennings in Taipei about the Tiananmen anniversary, the unrest involving Uighurs in western China’s Xinjiang region and whether he thinks he can ever return to his ancestral land.
 
Q: What has changed, what hasn’t changed in China and what does that mean?

A: Look at China. A lot of people would say China is very different today than it was 25 years ago. Twenty-five years make a lot of developing countries very different, both in the economic and socio-political aspects. However, it is also important to see what didn’t change in China. China remains, at least to me, still the totalitarian regime blocking me from going back to my home. They are still the Chinese government who ordered the (June 4, 1989) massacre not been held accountable for. They are still the same government trying to use every available means, often very brutal and iron-handed means, to suppress dissent, persecute dissidents. They probably have improved their technique. They probably have some artificial differences. For instance, today the police wear different uniforms and they are perhaps more professional, but the fundamental core is very much the same. It is a totalitarian regime. It’s a police state. It is a state where we do not have freedom of expression.

The biggest sensation I have is that it’s been 25 years. It’s a little too long for the things that didn’t change. It’s a little too long for me to be in exile. It’s a quarter of a century. In 1989 we started a campaign against communist totalitarianism under the flag of democracy. I don’t think we should be kept waiting for another 25 years.

Q: What has allowed China to not change over such a long period?

A: Deng Xiaoping basically turned China into capitalism and it partially answered our demand in 1989. I call it a deal the Chinese Communist Party has struck with the Chinese people, that is to give Chinese people economic freedom in exchange with political cooperation. It’s a lousy deal, but nevertheless the deal worked, but the question is for how long. The Chinese government is also realizing the deal they have struck in 1992 is expiring. They need to come up with something new.

Q: How do you know from the popular point of view that the deal is expiring?

A: Many different sectors of the society have come to the point of exploding. I’m pretty sure the Communist Party is well aware of the danger of total collapse. They admit that they’re also doing a lot of things about it, for instance their campaign of anti-corruption. But in China the corruption is systematic. The Chinese Communist Party built a structure to allow them to loot China legally. When they are waving the flag of anti-corruption they are basically just trimming a poisonous tree, one or two of the branches that is out of the seam. They are not really curing the problem.

Q: What does it take to go from today, a lot of discontent, to a situation where people are doing things to change things?

A: There is no way to stop the corruption, the greed. These things happen sometimes almost coincidentally. Then there are hundreds of thousands of incidents reported in China every year. They call it social unrest. Which one will become the next thing, I don’t know. For instance, the one in Shanghai; a couple of years ago there was a fire that took place and many people died. It’s a public hazard issue, but tens of thousands of people went on the street.

There are also signs the Communist Party wants to be in control of the social change. They may even initiate it. They did that before, in 1979, when Deng Xiaoping had the ‘open and reform’ policy. It gave the Communist Party 35 more years. If they’re smart enough, and I hope they are, maybe they can avoid a revolution-like change of the society.

Q: For people such as yourself, who are exiled to different parts of the world, do you think there is one sentiment that is crossing people’s minds around this time?

A: Return to China. Living in exile, we lost our stage. Back in 1989 we were important because we were on Tiananmen. If we can emerge ourselves onto that main stage, then we have a role. Definitely we are determined dissidents, true believers in democracy. We will pursue this idea at all costs.

Q: At all costs, like what? What’s your next move?

A: Freedom. Exile is in no way an ideal life for anybody. Exile is a mental torture. The will of ending the exile is very strong. My struggle to end my exile, to go home to see my aging parents, will not stop.

I have to refrain from talking about the details of my operations, but basically the idea is in 1989 we called for dialogue. We want to sit the Chinese government down and tell them we have a say on the table. We want to take part in the decision-making, policy-shifting. I will continue seeking every opportunity to initiate that counter-talk that we demanded 25 years ago, even if that counter-talk has to take place in a Chinese courtroom. Even if it has to come in the form of indictment and plea, I am willing to carry on the mission that we started 25 years ago.

Q: What will the anniversary itself do? Will it change anything, or just be another day on the calendar?

A: If there’s anything we’ve learned in exile it's to stop making predictions in China. Even if it’s just a day on the calendar on the wall, that calendar on the wall in front of people’s faces is a reminder of unfinished business. They will tighten their security. That is unfortunate. If the Chinese regime is smart enough to do this, this would be a good day to make peace with your own horrible history.

Q: Do you follow the events in Xinjiang? What do you expect as the fallout?

A: It’s a very sad situation in Xinjiang these days in my home country. Those are terrorist attacks where you kill innocent people, bystanders. But I really hope people can see beyond that and realize this is the last call of a despaired nation, an ethnic group that is giving up on life. It’s also a suicide attack. And it has been repeating. Uighur people are committing suicide these days. When they decide to take their own lives they want to take a few Chinese people together with them. It’s a very sad fact. It may keep happening.

Chinese also control their borders. They don’t want them to just leave. And it’s hard for the rest of the world to accept Uighurs as refugees.

China is destabilising south-east Asia, US defence secretary says

China is destabilising south-east Asia, US defence secretary says


. Chuck Hagel says US will not ignore belligerent Beijing's actions.
. Chinese general says 'criticisms are groundless'
. Washington pledges to support uneasy allies, including Japan 

theguardian.com,  Saturday 31 May 2014 16.52 BST

• 
  

  

  US Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel with Lieutenant General Wang Guanzhong, of China. Photograph: Pablo Martinez Monsivais/AP

China's aggressive moves to claim jurisdiction over land and sky in the Asia-Pacific risk undermining peace and security in the region and beyond, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said Saturday. Beijing scoffed as the "groundless" charges.

Hagel told an international security conference that the US "will not look the other way" when China and others try to restrict navigation or ignore international rules and standards.

Chin's territorial claims in the South China Sea are destabilising the region, he said, adding that Beijing's failure to resolve such disputes threatens East Asia's long-term progress.

A Chinese general took issue with Hagel's comments, saying that "although I do think that those criticisms are groundless, I do appreciate your candor."

A Vietnamese boat sank after being rammed by Chinese vessels near disputed islands last week. Photograph: Reuters

Lieutenant General Wang Guanzhong, deputy chief of the general staff, told Hagel during a brief meeting after the defense secretary's speech: "You were very candid this morning and, to be frank, more than our expectation."

Reporters were taken from the meeting room before Hagel responded. But the Pentagon press secretary, Rear Admiral John Kirby, said Hagel told Wang all regional disputes should be solved through diplomacy, and encouraged China to foster dialogue with neighbouring nations.

As he did in 2013, Hagel used his appearance at the Shangri-La conference to single out China for cyberspying against the US. While this has been a persistent complaint, his remarks came less than two weeks after the Obama administration charged five Chinese military officers with hacking into American companies to steal trade secrets.

The Chinese, in response, suspended participation in a US-China Cyber Working Group, and released a report that said the US is conducting"unscrupulous" cyber-espionage and that China is a major target.

Noting the suspension, Hagel said the US will continue to raise cyber issues with the Chinese, "because dialogue is essential for reducing the risk of miscalculation and escalation in cyberspace".

In comments aimed directly at China, Hagel said the US opposes any country's use of intimidation or threat of force to assert territorial claims.

"All nations of the region, including China, have a choice: to unite, and recommit to a stable regional order, or, to walk away from that commitment and risk the peace and security that has benefited millions of people throughout the Asia-Pacific, and billions of people around the world," he said.

China and Japan have been at odds over uninhabited islands in the East China Sea that are controlled by Japan but claimed by both.

The US has declined to take sides, but has made clear it has a treaty obligation to support Japan. The US also has refused to recognize China's declaration of an air defense zone over a large swath of the East China Sea, including the disputed islands.

In response, Major General Yao Yunzhu of China's People's Liberation Army questioned whether the US and its allies followed international law and consulted with others whey they set up air defence zones.

Yao, director of the Center for China-America Defense Relations at the PLA's Academy of Military Science, also challenged how the US can say it is not taking a position on the island sovereignty issue, while still saying it is committed to its treaty obligation to support Japan.

Hagel said the US and allies consulted with its neighbours and, unlike China, did not unilaterally set up air defence zones.

While the two public exchanges with the Chinese officials were sharp, a senior US defence official described Hagel's private meeting with Wang as fairly amicable.

The official, who was not authorized to discuss the meeting publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity, said Wang began by criticising the speech, but also talked about increasing military cooperation with the US and the two nations' trade relationship.

The Senkaku islands have been subject of a heated dispute between China and Japan. Photograph: Kyodo/Reuters

The official said Wang indicated China was looking forward to participating in a major military exercise in the Pacific with the US and other nations later this year.

US officials also have raised concerns about Beijing's decision to place an oil rig in part of the South China Sea also claimed by Vietnam. The move has led to a series of clashes between the two nations in the waters around the rig, including the recent sinking of a Vietnamese fishing boat.

Chinese leaders have blamed the Obama administration's new focus on Asia for emboldening some of the disputes.

But some Asian leaders have expressed worries that the US is doing little more than paying lip service to the complaints, fueling doubts about America's commitment to the region.

In an effort to address those concerns, Hagel also used his speech to reassure Asia-Pacific nations that despite persistent budget woes and increasing demands for military aid across Africa and Europe, the US was strongly committed to Asia.

Allies have questioned how serious the US is about its renewed focus on Asia, particularly as the recent unrest in Ukraine and terrorist threats in North Africa have garnered more attention. Also, President Barack Obama's national security speech this past week made no mention of the Asia-Pacific.

"The rebalance is not a goal, not a promise or a vision – it is a reality," Hagel said.

He laid out a list of moves the US has made to increase troops, ships and military assets in the region, provide missile defense systems to Japan, sell sophisticated drones and other aircraft to Korea, and expand defense cooperation with Australia, New Zealand and India.

5 Fake Foods in China That Are Totally Disgusting

I wanna be sick

Donald Couture, Project HoneyGate

Donald Couture, Canadian Food Wholesaler, Nabbed By U.S. In 'Project Honeygate'

CP  |  By The Canadian PressPosted: 02/21/2013

A Canadian man is among five people nabbed in "Project Honeygate," a U.S. Department of Homeland Security undercover investigation into an alleged honey importing scheme.

BALTIMORE - A Canadian man is among five people nabbed in "Project Honeygate," a U.S. Department of Homeland Security undercover investigation into an alleged honey importing scheme.

Five people and two companies are accused of flooding the market with cheaper honey from China and avoiding $180 million in duties, American officials said Wednesday.

The Chinese honey was declared as other commodities and shipped through other countries to the United States to avoid anti-dumping duties, Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials said.

Donald Couture, 60, the president, owner and operator of Premium Food Sales Inc., a broker and distributor of honey in Bradford, Ont., was indicted on four counts of violating the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.

Officials say one of Couture's customers in the U.S. rejected four container loads of his honey because it contained tetracycline, a common antimicrobial drug.

Couture, it's alleged, then sent the shipment to a different American customer without disclosing the presence of the antibiotic.

Couture was initially charged in a sealed complaint in November 2011 and the complaint was unsealed after he was indicted last week. Each count carries a maximum penalty of three years in prison and a $250,000 fine.

The website for Premium Food Sales Inc. was down Thursday, but a message left at a contact number on a cached version of the page was not returned.

The two companies charged are two of the United States' largest honey suppliers. Honey Holding, based in Baytown, Texas, agreed to pay $1 million in fines. Groeb Farms, based in Onsted, Mich., agreed to pay $2 million in fines, federal officials said.

An undercover agent posed as the director of procurement at Honey Holding, which co-operated in the "Project Honeygate" investigation. The probe was jointly announced by U.S. Customs and Border Protection officials.

The deputy director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement — the principal investigative arm of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security — said such schemes force legitimate importers and the domestic honey industry to endure years of unprofitable operations that put some out of business.

"We will continue to enforce criminal violations of anti-dumping laws in all industries so American and foreign businesses all play by the same rules," Daniel Ragsdale said.

Three honey brokers and the former sales director for Honey Holding were also charged.

Groeb Farms said in a statement the company takes full responsibility and regrets any errors made in honey importing, noting the allegations primarily involved two former senior executives.

The company said the executives were responsible for purchasing and misled the company's board, customers and public. The company also noted that federal officials have not alleged any violation of food safety laws by Groeb Farms.

A telephone call and email to Honey Holding was not immediately returned.

The Commerce Department determined in 2001 that Chinese honey was being sold in the United States at less than fair market value and imposed anti-dumping duties as high as 221 per cent of the declared value, the agencies said in a statement.

In 2008, federal authorities began investigating allegations of illegal importing that led to charges against 14 individuals, including executives of a German food conglomerate, who were accused of evading about $80 millions in anti-dumping duties. That investigation also led to the seizure of more than 3,000 drums of honey, federal officials said.

The charges announced Wednesday were the second phase of the investigation, focusing on domestic demand in the United States. Some of the honey contained antibiotics not approved for use in honey, but none of the charges allege any illnesses or public health consequences stemming from the honey.

Randy Verhoek, president of the American Honey Producers, said the charges were "like a dream come true" for the bee and honey industry. Verhoek said illegal imports of Chinese honey have created a two-tier market in which American producers and legitimate importers struggle to compete financially.

Tests Show Most Store Honey Isn’t Honey.

U.S. Honey Processors Charged with ‘Honey Laundering’

3/1/2013 12:09:40 PM

By Food Safety News

Five people and two U.S. honey processors were charged with federal crimes last week as a result of an investigation into illegal importation of honey from China, known as “Honeygate,” led by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Homeland Security Investigations.  
The government is alleging that Chinese honey — which can be laced with illegal and unsafe antibiotics — was misdeclared when it was imported to the United States and routed through other countries to evade more than $180 million in anti-dumping duties. HSI and Customs and Border Protection said late last week they have stepped up efforts to combat commercial fraud that directly impacts the economy and public health.
The charges come more than a year after an investigation by Food Safety News found that laboratory tests could not detect the origin of more than three quarters of honey purchased at retail locations because ultra-filtration methods remove naturally occurring pollen and make honey impossible to trace. Many in the industry say this practice contributes to honey laundering.
As one honey producer put it: “It’s no secret to anyone in the business that the only reason all the pollen is filtered out is to hide where it initially came from and the fact is that in almost all cases, that is China.”
According to the government, Honey Holding, which was doing business as Honey Solutions of Baytown, Texas and Groeb Farms Inc. of Onsted, Michigan — two of the country’s largest honey suppliers — have entered into deferred prosecution agreements. Honey Holding has agreed to pay $1 million and Groeb Farms has agreed to pay $2 million in fines. Both companies have also agreed to implement corporate compliance programs as part of their respective agreements.
“These businesses intentionally deprived the U.S. government of millions of dollars in unpaid duties,” said ICE Deputy Director Daniel Ragsdale. “Schemes like this result in legitimate importers and the domestic honey-producing industry enduring years of unprofitable operations, with some even being put out of business. We will continue to enforce criminal violations of anti-dumping laws in all industries so American and foreign businesses all play by the same rules.”
In a news release last week, the government said the individual defendants also include three honey brokers, the former director of sales for Honey Holding and the president of Premium Food Sales Inc., a broker and distributor of raw and processed honey in Bradford, Ontario.
As reported in 2011, Ernie Groeb, the president and CEO of Groeb Farms Inc., which calls itself “the world’s largest packer of honey,” told Food Safety News that doesn’t have a specific requirement regarding pollen content for the 85 million pounds of honey Groeb Farms purchases.
“We buy basically what’s considered raw honey. We trust good suppliers. That’s what we rely on,” said Groeb.
The government started investigating allegations of circumventing anti-dumping duties in the honey trade in 2008. The investigation resulted in charges against 14 individuals, including executives of a German food conglomerate. Several people were charged with evading approximately $80 million in anti-dumping duties on Chinese honey and officials seized more than 3,000 drums of honey that illegally entered the U.S.
The second phase of the investigation, announced last week, focuses on honey that was bought and processed by U.S. companies for domestic sale.
“Some of that honey was adulterated with antibiotics not approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for use in honey,” said DHS. “None of the charges allege any instances of illness or other public health consequences attributed to consumption of the honey. The investigation is continuing.”
DHS did not return requests for more information about antibiotic residues in the illegally imported honey.
“Trade fraud can have significant implications for the U.S. economy and consumers,” said Customs and Border Patrol Chief Operating Officer Thomas S. Winkowski, in a statement. “These products take jobs away from American workers and frequently violate U.S. health and safety standards, potentially endangering the public. CBP is committed to fighting these fraudulent actors alongside our government partners.”

See Food Safety News‘ investigation on ultra-filtered and illegally imported honey by Andrew Schneider: Tests Show Most Store Honey Isn’t Honey.

ALERT NEWS WARNING Your Food Safety China's next food scandal fake honey!

The honey sold off the shelf is virtually all Canola based.Canola is all GMO'd now. You wont find that on their labels. When  asked they will tell you its part of the mixture of sources and blends...a weasel word cop out!
Billy Bee, BeeMaid etc...

Honey From China You Say, GMO Canola Too,This Is Sick

March 19, 2014 –Honey – one of the most natural foods. In the supermarket, honey is found labelled as coming from clover, buckwheat, alfalfa or maybe orange blossom. The label might just read ‘honey’ without any indication of its source of nectar. But is the nectar source even important to those of us wishing to become more conscientious eaters? As I’ve discovered, there is a curiosity surrounding honey – a curiosity, which, has rarely, if ever, been spoken… until now!

In Canada, 80% of all the honey produced in the country is from the nectar of canola, and 75-90% of annual production is exported to the United States – yet, nowhere on the grocery store shelves do we ever see honey labelled as “canola honey”. And so the question becomes – just where is all that canola honey ending up?

Certified Master Beekeeper Brian Campbell of Blessed Bee Farm in Richmond, British Columbia has an answer;

“A major crop in Canada is genetically engineered canola. And it’s bee pollinated. And beekeepers take honey off that genetically engineered canola. There is no “genetically engineered canola honey” for sale in Canada. Where the hell does it go? Well, they just re-label or they don’t label it at all. They use it as a blend to equalize flavour in other honey. So you know, if you’re not pro genetically engineered food, then really you shouldn’t be eating the honey off of the store shelves.”

As many of us are becoming more and more concerned with the health of honeybees and wild bee populations, it seems like knowing the source of our honey is critical. Knowing the source can communicate what agricultural and beekeeping practices were used on the ground and we can gauge what systems of production we’re supporting by simply knowing the source of our honey. As I’ve learned, those practices can have dramatically different impacts on the earth, on the bees, and perhaps, on human health.

Not much. Other than a very small mom and pop operation in Alberta, a Google search of “canola honey” turns up nothing – no major honey packer makes mention of canola on their labels or on their web sites. As it turns out, there are also no federal labelling laws in Canada or the US which restrict the use of the terms ‘Clover’, ‘Alfalfa’, or any other stated nectar source. That means a product labelled as “Clover”, “Alfalfa”, or any other nectar source might have canola blended into it without any requirements to label it accurately. As for the products just labelled as honey, only a best guess can lend insights into its true contents!

Owned by McCormick & Company (US), Billy Bee is Canada’s largest honey packer and one of the largest in the world. Billy Bee turned down our request to appear on our Honey television episode. Their products or web site make no mention of canola honey despite the company sourcing most of their honey from Alberta and Saskatchewan – the epicenters of canola production. As seen below, canola isn’t even mentioned on their Sources of Honeyweb page:

We did send Billy Bee an email asking if their products contain canola honey. Their response,“Honey is produced from the nectar that bees gather from flowers (such as alfalfa, canola and clover)”.

Canada’s second largest honey packer. Their slogan is “Mother Nature’s Perfect Food”…

BeeMaid makes no mention of canola honey on their products’ labels but on the company’s web site there is a brief canola comment made as part of their “Hive to Home” videos…

An email was sent to the company asking if their products contain canola. The response –“Our classic honey is a multi-floral source of Canola, Alfalfa and Clover. Our premium clover honey is still multi floral but would contain mostly clover.”

Burleson’s is the largest honey packer in the US southwest. This company also makes no mention of canola on their products or web site yet their labels on their Clover Honey are telling… (note the field of canola behind the word “clover”!!!)

An email was also sent to Burleson’s asking if the company uses canola. Their response, “We do not distribute a canola specific honey although many of Burleson’s honeys are a blend of honeys collected from several beekeepers and a variety of floral sources so canola is likely part of the mix.  We blend the honey to create the consistent flavor and color our customers have come to expect.”

True Source is an initiative launched by different players in the US honey industry to respond to concerns with illegal circumvented honey coming into the United States and Canada (predominantly from China). This concern was highlighted as part of Deconstructing Dinner’s Honey episode. Honey packers like Burleson’s and Bee Maid use the True Source logo which is said to communicate to eaters that the company pledges to “carry truthful labelling as to its source”. I interviewed True Source spokesperson Jill Clark for our Genetically Engineered Honey podcast. Clark confirmed that True Source does not guarantee any claims as to the floral source of honey but only guarantees claims of the product’s geographic origins.

1. The unknown human health impacts of inserting genes in a lab from one species or kingdom into another

2. With the majority of GE plants requiring the use of toxic chemicals to function as designed, GE foods are directly linked to the use of these chemical herbicides and thereby whatever impacts those chemicals have on water and soil quality, impacts to wildlife – both plants and animals, air quality, and human health.

3. With GE plants being patented technology – the companies owning those patents are granted significant power over how those plants are grown and who grows then – it’s ultimately the ownership of life, and a significant level of control over the global supply of seed.

4. There is growing suspicion that the presence of GE plants and the systems required to grow those plants are a contributor to the declines in honeybee populations worldwide and until we can be certain, many people have long been calling on the precautionary principle to be used.

5. While not specific to GE plants, there has also been growing concern that the class of chemicals known as neonicitinoids (or neonics) is a contributor to global declines in bee populations. In Western Canada, the most prevalent use of neonics – is on canola and almost all of that canola is sprayed with these controversial chemicals. According to the Canadian Honey Council, half of all the honeybee colonies in the country spend part of their life pollinating canola.

And so with these controversial underpinnings of GE plants and in this case, GE canola, it’s no wonder the honey industry seems to be taking careful measures to ensure that canola honey, despite its widespread presence on supermarket shelves, is not mentioned on the label, nor on most honey packer’s web sites.

And so with no systems in place to assure the public of the types of honey which are truly in the container – anyone concerned with the presence of honey from genetically engineered canola is better off avoiding the supermarket shelves. Instead, consider informing yourself about honey standards of identity initiatives, perhaps consider producing your very own honey, or, support a local beekeeper who you can meet and develop a trusting relationship with.

- Jon Steinman