Helen Joyce is an Irish journalist, currently director of advocacy for campaign group Sex Matters.[3][4] She studied as a mathematician and worked in academia before switching to journalism. Joyce began working for The Economist as education correspondent for its Britain section in 2005 and has since held several senior positions, including finance editor and international editor.[5] She published her book Trans: When Ideology Meets Reality in 2021.

Helen Joyce is an Irish journalist, currently director of advocacy for campaign group Sex Matters.[3][4] She studied as a mathematician and worked in academia before switching to journalism. Joyce began working for The Economist as education correspondent for its Britain section in 2005 and has since held several senior positions, including finance editor and international editor.[5] She published her book Trans: When Ideology Meets Reality in 2021. Helen Joyce Helen Joyce MoneyConf 2018 (1) (cropped).jpg Joyce speaking at MoneyConf 2018 Born 1968 (age 54–55)[1] Dublin, Ireland[1] Alma mater Trinity College Dublin (BA) University of Cambridge (Part III of the Mathematical Tripos) University College London (PhD) Occupation Director of advocacy for campaign group Sex Matters Notable work Trans: When Ideology Meets Reality Family Gus Joyce (brother) Ed Joyce (brother) Dominick Joyce (brother) Isobel Joyce (sister) Cecelia Joyce (sister)[1][2] Website thehelenjoyce.com Early life and education Career Edit Returning to University College London to work on a project run by the geology department, Joyce became interested in what she later described as the "business of telling non-mathematicians about maths." In 2000 she joined the newly launched Millennium Mathematics Project (MMP) at the University of Cambridge promoting mathematics education in schools and other venues. For two years she worked on an MMP project which enabled mathematicians to interact directly with schools using video.[13] In 2002 she was named editor of the project's online Plus Magazine, a position she held for three years. In 2004 she also became founding editor for the Royal Statistical Society's quarterly magazine Significance,[13] with the aim to demonstrate in an entertaining and thought-provoking way the practical use of statistics and to show how they are of benefit to people in all walks of life.[5] In 2005 Joyce became education correspondent for The Economist.[5] Four years later she transferred to the newspaper's project exploring how to best present statistics to readers. In August 2010 she moved to São Paulo to become The Economist′s Brazil bureau chief,[13] a position she held through 2013. Returning to London she served as The Economist′s finance editor and international editor and in March 2020 became its executive editor for events business.[5] In 2022, she took a one year unpaid sabbatical from The Economist[5] and became director of advocacy for Sex Matters.[3] In January 2023 she decided to stay at Sex Matters rather than return to The Economist.[14] She explained this decision saying, "If I wanted to go back [to journalism], I would really have had to stop doing [campaign work]... It's only escalating and escalating, and just in good conscience I didn't feel I could go back."[15] Views on transgender topics Edit In July 2018, Joyce curated a series of articles on transgender identity in The Economist.[16] GLAAD described Joyce's December 2018 article "The New Patriarchy: How Trans Radicalism Hurts Women, Children—and Trans People Themselves" for Quillette as 'alarming' stating they have "no place in a newsroom". Joyce responded that the organization had been "co-opted by [GLAAD board member] Anthony Watson to continue his unprovoked attacks against me".[17] In March 2019 The Daily Dot reported that Joyce "claimed, among other things, that the trans rights movement is enabling sexual predators... referred to puberty blockers or other treatments that affirm a trans child’s sense of self as 'sickening'... [and] also called these procedures 'child abuse,' 'unethical medicine,' 'mass experimentation,' and a 'global scandal'".[17] In June 2022 PinkNews reported that Joyce had spoken in favour of "reducing or keeping down the number of people who transition" and that "every one of those people is a person who's been damaged" and "every one of those people is basically, you know, a huge problem to a sane world".[18] Trans: When Ideology Meets Reality Edit In July 2021, Joyce's book Trans: When Ideology Meets Reality, was published by Oneworld Publications. The book sold well, debuting within a week of its publication at number 7 on The Sunday Times list of bestselling general hardbacks[19] and remaining in the top 10 for a second week.[20] It was named as one of the year's best books by The Times.[21] The book received other positive reviews in the Evening Standard,[22] New Statesman,[23] and The Scotsman.[24] The Times regular columnist David Aaronovitch wrote that "Joyce [examines] a new ideology about gender. This holds that biological sex is as much a 'social construct' as the idea of gender is. One benefit of Joyce's book is its intellectual clarity and its refusal to compromise. So she takes apart this ideology of gender with a cold rigour."[25] Kathleen Stock, then a professor of philosophy at the University of Sussex and author of Material Girls: Why Reality Matters for Feminism (2021), gave Trans a 5-star review at The Telegraph, calling it a "superlative critical analysis of trans activism" and that "Joyce shows an impressive capacity to handle complex statistics, legal statutes, and other bits of evidence without losing clarity or narrative drive."[26] The Guardian gave it a mixed review.[27] A review at Publishers Weekly criticized the book as "alarmist" and a "one-sided takedown" that "comes up short."[28] Aaron Rabinowitz, writing for The Skeptic,[29] criticized Joyce for her mirroring activist Jennifer Bilek's ideas and accused Joyce of incorporating her antisemitic canards in her work, by claiming that George Soros and other Jewish billionaires are the transhumanist shapers of a global agenda behind the transgender rights movement, through financial contributions to organizations such as Planned Parenthood and the American Civil Liberties Union.[30] Joyce published a rebuttal to these allegations, writing that she had been "subjected to a smear campaign... because that’s what happens to anyone who publicly dissents from gender-identity ideology—the notion that what makes you a man or woman isn’t your immutable biology, but what you declare yourself to be." She rejected accusations of antisemitism, saying "I didn’t deliberately select three Jewish donors; it never occurred to me to think about their religions. Two of the three, it turns out, are indeed Jewish, though that is not something I mention in my book because it is utterly irrelevant." Joyce denied plagiarism, denounced Bilek for antisemitism and reiterated the thesis of her book. She also corrected a claim about a donation made by Open Society Foundation; the donation was to a similarly named group which also advocated for gender self-identification.[31] Talks Edit In March 2022 Joyce was due to appear in a panel to discuss her book and views on gender theory. This panel would have been part of an event for an expected 100 to 150 trainee child psychiatrists organised by Great Ormond Street Hospital and Health Education England. Before the event the organisers received allegations against Joyce and were warned "There is no possible way in which this event can possibly be a 'safe environment’ for LGBTQ+ and especially trans participants". Joyce was disinvited days before the event, which was later postponed. Joyce said, "It's outrageous that a journalist who has written a best-selling book spelling out the harms of this bizarre, evidence-free ideology is no-platformed and subjected to a smear campaign."[32] In October 2022, Joyce participated in an interview with economist Partha Dasgupta at Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge.[33][34] Philosopher Arif Ahmed hosted the event, titled "Criticising gender-identity ideology: what happens when speech is silenced".[34] Protestors chanted "trans rights are human rights" and banged drums outside the event.[33] The college master Pippa Rogerson and senior tutor Andrew Spencer boycotted the event and described Joyce's views as "polemics".[33] In response, Joyce published an open letter entitled "Has Cambridge abandoned debate?" in The Spectator.[35] Personal life Edit Joyce lives in Cambridge with her husband and two sons.[36][37] She had unexplained infertility and used IVF to conceive them.[38] Joyce was raised Irish Catholic, but is now an avowed atheist.[1] References External links Last edited 13 days ago by Pincrete RELATED ARTICLES Trans: When Ideology Meets Reality 2021 book by Helen Joyce The Transgender Issue 2021 non-fiction book Stella O'Malley Irish psychotherapist and author Wikipedia Content is available under CC BY-SA 3.0 unless otherwise noted. Privacy policy Terms of Use Desktop

Explainer16:33 Why York University de-platformed me Supposedly, I am a safety threat

Why York University de-platformed me Supposedly, I am a safety threat BY JULIE BINDEL Screengrab from the Student Solidarity network In January this year I was asked to speak at an event organised by York Free Speech, part of York University. I love engaging with open-minded students and I was delighted to accept the offer. The topic was feminism, specifically a critique of what I call ‘feminism for men’, which is currently the only topic that gets an airing at most universities. I sat and waited. I knew that it wouldn’t be long before certain trans lobby groups tried to get me de-platformed. Almost every time I am invited to speak at universities, there is a massive fight between those that want to hear a genuinely feminist perspective, and those who think that my mere presence will cause the death of transgender and ‘sex working’ people on campus.

I didn’t have to wait long. A couple of weeks ago I received my first email from the University LGBTQ+ Network Committee accusing me of transphobia and telling me that I was likely to break the university’s code of conduct. ‘Our number one priority is the safety of the students,’ read the email, adding ‘as much as trans issues are something which can be discussed by everyone, we do not want this to infringe on the safety and well-being of students’.

I have no idea why they were emailing me as I had not intended to speak about the trans issue at all. It seemed that they were threatening me to keep quiet about anything that they might consider to be contentious. I told them I would be talking about feminism and refused to engage further.

Two days before I was due to travel to York, the event was cancelled. Days earlier the student union had removed the details of the event from the website, mumbling about ‘thorough risk assessments’. Essentially, they’re worried about spending more money on security for these events, so the organisers then usually cancel because they are then liable for the additional cost incurred.

This group of airheads have decided that I would be their maximum of 5/5 likelihood to breach the university’s Equality, Diversity and Inclusion policy. The fact that I am a woman of working-class origin, an out lesbian, and a lifelong feminist is obviously irrelevant to these privileged kids who think being pansexual or non-binary is an oppression.

Some choice quotes from student activists on the Student Solidarity Network Instagram account include: ‘Julie Bindel’s whole career is founded in supporting the mass homicide of sex workers.’ I was called a ‘bigot’, ‘dangerous’, and someone that regularly peddles hate speech and incitement to violence against marginalised groups. I was also labelled a homophobe and a misogynist, with over 40 years of my campaigning against male violence and women’s oppression dismissed.

If this anti-democratic, censorious bullying is allowed to continue, universities will become nothing more than breeding ground for men’s rights activists. We must put an end to it.

A University of York spokesperson told the York Press: “This isn’t about no-platforming, but all the appropriate practical steps to make an event safe had not been put in place for the event to go ahead at this time – such as stewarding, suitable ticketing, event chairing and any necessary security.

York University have been contacted for comment. Jona Something has gone badly wrong with tertiary education in this country. It seems to comprise a very large number – i.e. many thousands – of bigoted and, frankly, stupid students studying worthless subjects and being taught by equally bigoted and stupid staff, at fifth rate institutions, yet at the same time the tax-payer funded liability for student debt grows into the hundreds of millions (is it a billion yet?). We should get a grip on this. 51 REPLY Michael Cavanaugh Michael Cavanaugh 11 months ago Reply to Jonathan Nash Full sheepskin, half-education. 2 REPLY Ted Ditchburn Ted Ditchburn 11 months ago Reply to Jonathan Nash Spot on…thick as mince half of them. David Lammy has a degree apparently but his Mastermind appearance was beyond parody. 0 REPLY Martin Bollis Martin Bollis 11 months ago I’m assuming Julie wasn’t intending to assault anybody. So the LGBT body assessed the risk of the LGBT body creating trouble, as too expensive to steward! Last edited 11 months ago by Martin Bollis 48 REPLY Lesley van Reenen Lesley van Reenen 11 months ago Reply to Martin Bollis You’ve hit the nail on the head! 17 REPLY

Joy Bailey J Since when can a lesbian be a homophobe and a misogynist? How did these students ever get to university … sigh. 42 REPLY Jonathan Andrews Jonathan Andrews 11 months ago Julie Bindel is often intensely irritating, generally awful to men but she has integrity and is worth listening to. Even the nasty bits! She should definitely never be prevented from speaking to people. 39 REPLY Francis MacGabhann Francis MacGabhann 11 months ago Reply to Jonathan Andrews Quite. I mean, you don’t HAVE to listen. 13 REPLY Tom Lewis Tom Lewis 11 months ago I was all in until Julie said “nothing more than breeding ground for men’s right activists”. Talk about pot complaining about kettle. She makes lots of good observations, but is blinded (Bindled) to the part of feminist rights activists, herself amongst them, leading the charge from the front, has influenced and inspired the activism that she now seems to so abore. 32 REPLY Norman Powers Norman Powers 11 months ago Reply to Tom Lewis New here, are we? Bindel writes exactly one article, over and over again in slightly different words. It’s always the same – a cry of anguish asking why her old virtue points don’t work anymore, asking why she’s suddenly on the receiving end of the sword she’s been wielding for decades. These articles are mostly good for black comedy. Unlike a lot of other stuff you find on Unherd, Bindel’s writing never provokes thought, just schadenfreude like this: Welcome to the men’s club, Julie! Don’t worry. We’ll accept you even if you don’t pretend to be a man. Now you know what it’s like to be constantly accused of being a misogynist despite having done nothing wrong. Does it make you feel bad about all the times you called men’s rights activists misogynists? No? Oh. Well then. Maybe after another decade of ending up with the same “rights” that we have, you’ll find out you have more in common with those activists than you think. 29 REPLY Skip Simonds Skip Simonds 11 months ago Reply to Norman Powers The phrase she is “hoist with one’s own petard” comes to mind. 7 REPLY David McDowell David McDowell 11 months ago Reply to Skip Simonds Every time she opens her mouth 0 REPLY Jeremy Bray Jeremy Bray 11 months ago Reply to Norman Powers I’m not sure how your comment got past the moderators given that the last time I simply queried a rather startling statement of Julie Bindel’s my post was deleted by the moderators. The name’s not Norman Powers more like Super Powers. 2 REPLY MJ Reid MJ Reid 11 months ago Reply to Norman Powers From a feminist point of view, and I have been a feminist for a few more years than Julie, you don’t seem to get it. Yet another man criticising a feminist for having a feminist point of view. It is refreshing to read some of the other comments where me say they don’t necessarily agree with what Julie says but that they are willing to support her right to say it. Unlike yourself, hypercritical about something that is very important to very many women. -2 REPLY Ted Ditchburn Ted Ditchburn 11 months ago Reply to Norman Powers That;s weird…I just exemplified what your are saying in another reply..and then read yours… 0 REPLY Linda Hutchinson Linda Hutchinson 11 months ago Reply to Tom Lewis Unfortunately, Ms Bindel does have a tendency to gratuously add these anti-male bits even when her arguments are sound. I think that she would be better off all round leaving such things out, unless, of course, she can show that it was indeed a men’s rights group involved, then it’s relevant. Perhaps, being female, I find it easier to just ignore these bits and get on with reading the rest of what she is saying, but I would recommend that you try doing the same. 15 REPLY Ethniciodo Rodenydo Ethniciodo Rodenydo 11 months ago Reply to Linda Hutchinson “Ms Bindel does have a tendency to gratuitously add these anti-male bits” It is absolutely at the core of everything she believes. Of course it is easy for you to ignore because you are not on the receiving end. 12 REPLY Linda Hutchinson Linda Hutchinson 11 months ago Reply to Ethniciodo Rodenydo I did say that perhaps it’s easier for me as I’m a woman. But perhaps you can understand what it is like for a woman to hear continued anti-female rhetoric, even if it is easier for you to dismiss because you’re not on the receiving end. I must make clear that I’m not in anyway saying that you. personally, post anti-female comments, however, they often appear in the comments section of this site. 1 REPLY Ethniciodo Rodenydo Ethniciodo Rodenydo 11 months ago Reply to Linda Hutchinson I do not recall seeing any anti-females comment on this site. What I do see is that anything vaguely critical of feminism is denounced at misogyny. At the same time we seem to get article after article that are misandrist at their core. Unherd would dare print anything written by a man that put the reverse point of view. Someone did refer me to the below tweet. So there is at least one woman who gets it. “Women are finally experiencing in one part of society what men have been experiencing for decades. Being pushed out of their own spaces or being forced to accept the mentally ill. Congratulations on “equality”, ladies. You earned it. “Perhaps next time men speak about the importance of allowing them to have their own spaces, you’ll listen instead of complaining about inclusivity and declaring you’re “just as competent as them at x hobby or thing so why won’t they include you?” Remember this. ” If you cannot read this without thinking “well I didn’t personally ask for it”, then you are lost. Neither did I. I’m asking people to realize this cycle has been repeated over and over again and the only reason people are finally paying attention is because it’s about women.” 5 REPLY Andrew Dalton Andrew Dalton 11 months ago Reply to Linda Hutchinson I believe she is equivacating tran’s rights with men’s rights. That is tran’s rights is just a means of men expanding their own set of rights. I don’t know if she honestly believes that the men’s rights activists who spend their time discussing things like family court issues are the same people wanting suggesting that male born self-identified women are, and should be regarded, exactly as women. I very much doubt she honestly believes the former group are given any traction at universities. Last edited 11 months ago by Andrew Dalton 14 REPLY Simon Tavanyar Simon Tavanyar 11 months ago Reply to Tom Lewis I do believe that women are smarter than men, and this proves it. The men in this thread are lamentable, and I apologize for them, Julie. They don’t get what you are saying. When you disparage “men’s rights activists” you are dead on the money. Folks, men don’t need rights. We are born with them. Men have always enjoyed all the human rights on offer. Men are born to be strong, purposeful, responsible and free. Men don’t need to wonder if they should focus on child-rearing or making a career. They only have one avenue: their career. Make a success of that, and you win. Women are far more complicated. Not only do they have thousands of years of cultural oppression to overcome, they have no set value of what it means to be the ideal woman. That’s all up in the air. Women are the only way that another generation can come into existence, yet they struggle to know their purpose. Just being a woman in a man’s world is purpose enough! Women deserve support in learning to prosper in a man’s world with the choices that should be available to them. Some men fear this. They fear that they can’t compete with a woman who might be better than them in the office. Weak men were threatened, so they came with the idea of gender fluidity. If a man can identify as a woman, then all the support that feminism has brought women is theirs for the taking, as men. So the greatest opponents of true feminism are the trans rights activists who truly fear biological women. Don’t be one of those. -2 REPLY Michael Askew Michael Askew 9 months ago Reply to Tom Lewis Abhor 0 REPLY Jeremy Bray Jeremy Bray 11 months ago This a piece of safety first bureaucracy reaction just as we have to suffer a dodgy automatic moderating system checking comments here as a cost effective means of avoiding offensive comment so the University is taking a safety first cost effective course of action when LGBTQ+ violence is threatened. Of course in a civilised society Julie Bindel’s views should be available to whomever wished to hear them without interruption. No one is forced to hear her or read her articles. Unfortunately today any group is able to shut down debate by someone they deem unacceptable by threatening disruption and violence and instead of the police being asked to intervene and prosecute such threatening behaviour the extremist group gains its ends. 23 REPLY Linda Hutchinson Linda Hutchinson 11 months ago ‘Julie Bindel’s whole career is founded in supporting the mass homicide of sex workers.’ If the above was actually posted it would, I assume, be libellous, and Ms Bindel would be within her rights to sue. This is a serious accusation and should not be allowed to stand. Last edited 11 months ago by Linda Hutchinson 16 REPLY Warren T Warren T 11 months ago Reply to Linda Hutchinson It is utterly mind boggling what is allowed to stand these days vs. what gets de-platformed or canceled. 9 REPLY Tom May Tom May 11 months ago Reply to Warren T Completely agree with you. It’s firetrucking ridiculous on its face and yet someone said it with serious intent. And some believe it. 1 REPLY Warren T Warren T 11 months ago Regardless of how much I would disagree with Ms. Bindel, I would never, even for a moment, think of shouting her off a stage or prevent her from speaking. It is quite ironic, however, that the loudest shouting seems to come from those who need the free speech protection of a democratic society the most. 14 REPLY Henry Haslam Henry Haslam 11 months ago Too much is unexplained. Why had ‘appropriate practical steps to make the event safe’ not been put in place? Was to because the organisers expected the event to be cancelled? Or because the threats to disruption meant that the necessary security would have cost more than could be afforded? Could Julie Bindel’s critics be challenged to give a coherent and fully explained statement of their criticism? And be challenged to an in-depth debate on the issues raised? Could York Free Speech have turned the event into a webinar? With lots of time for questions, either live or through the chair? Recorded or not, according to choice. 7 REPLY William Shaw William Shaw 11 months ago Julie Bindel always undermines her own case, even when she has a valid point, by engaging in extreme and blatant misandry. 6 REPLY Judy Simpson Judy Simpson 11 months ago Reply to William Shaw My thoughts exactly. I was with her until the last paragraph. 5 REPLY Martin Smith Martin Smith 11 months ago There’s plenty of people complaining about Ms Bindel in these comments. They don’t like her apparantly. So what? Is this a reason to ban her, or anyone, from speaking? Our “Unis” are a disgrace. 5 REPLY Michael James Michael James 11 months ago Public intellectuals should boycott universities as unsafe spaces. 3 REPLY Ian Stewart Ian Stewart 11 months ago Julie, couldn’t you sue them for these slanders? If you need money to sue them I’m sure it would be well supported by crowd sourcing. 2 REPLY Jeremy Bray Jeremy Bray 11 months ago Reply to Ian Stewart If it was in written form it would be libel. As the statement that her career is founded on the mass murder of sex workers is so obviously ridiculous it would no doubt be passed off as a joke in bad taste not to be taken seriously like Jo Brand’s battery battery acid “joke”. But most importantly there is no point in suing unless you at least recover your legal costs which most students, even those with well healed parents, usually don’t have the means to pay. 0 REPLY Explore Groupthink Capitalism Flyover country Faith & Meaning Confessions Podcast Quick Links About UnHerd Contact Us Columnists & Writers Old Queen Street Cafe Terms & Conditions Privacy Policy Community Guidelines Vacancies Contribute to UnHerd We welcome applications to contribute to UnHerd – please fill out the form below including examples of your previously published work. Please click here to submit your pitch. Advertise with us Please click here to view our media pack for more information on advertising and partnership opportunities with UnHerd.

] I want to put the peace plan here for people to read:[2] China’s Position on the Political Settlement of the Ukraine Crisis

I am starting to wonder if something is afoot. China released their peace plan a few days ago. It outlaid a 10 set process to peace in Ukraine. It was written very carefully that even Zelensky recognized the merit of the plan. [1] I want to put the peace plan here for people to read:[2] China’s Position on the Political Settlement of the Ukraine Crisis 2023-02-24 09:00 1. Respecting the sovereignty of all countries. Universally recognized international law, including the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter, must be strictly observed. The sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of all countries must be effectively upheld. All countries, big or small, strong or weak, rich or poor, are equal members of the international community. All parties should jointly uphold the basic norms governing international relations and defend international fairness and justice. Equal and uniform application of international law should be promoted, while double standards must be rejected. 2. Abandoning the Cold War mentality. The security of a country should not be pursued at the expense of others. The security of a region should not be achieved by strengthening or expanding military blocs. The legitimate security interests and concerns of all countries must be taken seriously and addressed properly. There is no simple solution to a complex issue. All parties should, following the vision of common, comprehensive, cooperative and sustainable security and bearing in mind the long-term peace and stability of the world, help forge a balanced, effective and sustainable European security architecture. All parties should oppose the pursuit of one’s own security at the cost of others’ security, prevent bloc confrontation, and work together for peace and stability on the Eurasian Continent. 3. Ceasing hostilities. Conflict and war benefit no one. All parties must stay rational and exercise restraint, avoid fanning the flames and aggravating tensions, and prevent the crisis from deteriorating further or even spiraling out of control. All parties should support Russia and Ukraine in working in the same direction and resuming direct dialogue as quickly as possible, so as to gradually deescalate the situation and ultimately reach a comprehensive ceasefire. 4. Resuming peace talks. Dialogue and negotiation are the only viable solution to the Ukraine crisis. All efforts conducive to the peaceful settlement of the crisis must be encouraged and supported. The international community should stay committed to the right approach of promoting talks for peace, help parties to the conflict open the door to a political settlement as soon as possible, and create conditions and platforms for the resumption of negotiation. China will continue to play a constructive role in this regard. 5. Resolving the humanitarian crisis. All measures conducive to easing the humanitarian crisis must be encouraged and supported. Humanitarian operations should follow the principles of neutrality and impartiality, and humanitarian issues should not be politicized. The safety of civilians must be effectively protected, and humanitarian corridors should be set up for the evacuation of civilians from conflict zones. Efforts are needed to increase humanitarian assistance to relevant areas, improve humanitarian conditions, and provide rapid, safe and unimpeded humanitarian access, with a view to preventing a humanitarian crisis on a larger scale. The UN should be supported in playing a coordinating role in channeling humanitarian aid to conflict zones. 6. Protecting civilians and prisoners of war (POWs). Parties to the conflict should strictly abide by international humanitarian law, avoid attacking civilians or civilian facilities, protect women, children and other victims of the conflict, and respect the basic rights of POWs. China supports the exchange of POWs between Russia and Ukraine, and calls on all parties to create more favorable conditions for this purpose. 7. Keeping nuclear power plants safe. China opposes armed attacks against nuclear power plants or other peaceful nuclear facilities, and calls on all parties to comply with international law including the Convention on Nuclear Safety (CNS) and resolutely avoid man-made nuclear accidents. China supports the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in playing a constructive role in promoting the safety and security of peaceful nuclear facilities. 8. Reducing strategic risks. Nuclear weapons must not be used and nuclear wars must not be fought. The threat or use of nuclear weapons should be opposed. Nuclear proliferation must be prevented and nuclear crisis avoided. China opposes the research, development and use of chemical and biological weapons by any country under any circumstances. 9. Facilitating grain exports. All parties need to implement the Black Sea Grain Initiative signed by Russia, Türkiye, Ukraine and the UN fully and effectively in a balanced manner, and support the UN in playing an important role in this regard. The cooperation initiative on global food security proposed by China provides a feasible solution to the global food crisis. 10. Stopping unilateral sanctions. Unilateral sanctions and maximum pressure cannot solve the issue; they only create new problems. China opposes unilateral sanctions unauthorized by the UN Security Council. Relevant countries should stop abusing unilateral sanctions and “long-arm jurisdiction” against other countries, so as to do their share in deescalating the Ukraine crisis and create conditions for developing countries to grow their economies and better the lives of their people. 11. Keeping industrial and supply chains stable. All parties should earnestly maintain the existing world economic system and oppose using the world economy as a tool or weapon for political purposes. Joint efforts are needed to mitigate the spillovers of the crisis and prevent it from disrupting international cooperation in energy, finance, food trade and transportation and undermining the global economic recovery. 12. Promoting post-conflict reconstruction. The international community needs to take measures to support post-conflict reconstruction in conflict zones. China stands ready to provide assistance and play a constructive role in this endeavor. ____________________________________________ If you read between the lines here, you will know exactly what China is saying. As stated earlier China released various formal geopolitical stances, including probably the most damning called the US Hegemony and It’s Perils. [3] The paper released just before the peace plan outlines a very strong criticism and highlights various actions of the United States, and the importance of not succumbing to its might in various areas. Every world leader would have had that paper on their desk, including Macron. It is perhaps one of the most important geopolitical papers written this decade. So given that information we can see the peace plan above in the light in which it is intended. It is essentially the only path to peace, but who is stopping this process going forward? As former Israeli Prime Minister has stated, as well as Turkish leaders, the US has been blocking peace in Ukraine. [4] Unilateral sanctions are not contributing to peace, nor is sending weapons. There is only one factor here stopping the peace process, and that is the US - so its not surprising that Biden and NATO stooges have condemned the Chinese peace plan. [5] And as the Duran pointed out, the timing of the release of these papers were perfectly timed to give the impression that China was the most reasonable party internationally.[6] How is condemning this peace plan good for international relations? What it further proves is that some of these western leaders have no interest in peace, and the international community is watching. This essentially gives China a political edge, looking more like a world leader that it is quickly becoming. Not only this, this strong move from China indicates the situation on the battlefield, as these papers almost are an admission of the Chinese government that the US is after them as a competitor, to US economic dominance. Would they be so quick to do so if their closest ally, Russia, was not in a strong position? Back to France, Macron has somewhat broken rank with the US and has ‘lauded’ the peace plan. [7] The question I ask myself, why then is Macron flying to China in a month time to discuss the plan? [8] Given peace demonstrations in Germany and France, many citizens in these nations do not want anything to do with this war. [9] Is he really discussing this peace plan or is he discussing the other Chinese paper, the one regarding US hegemony and how it can be countered? Is this finally a move by the EU ( or perhaps just France ) to wriggle out of the vice grip of US imperial control? I really hope so. Footnotes [1] Ukraine sees some value in Chinese peace plan [2] China’s Position on the Political Settlement of the Ukraine Crisis [3] US Hegemony and Its Perils [4] Former Israeli PM Bennett says U.S. ‘blocked’ his attempts at a Russia-Ukraine peace deal | MR Online [5] ABC News: Biden dismisses China’s proposed peace plan [6] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5lBSOAnQrhE [7] Macron lauds China's peace proposal for Ukraine, reveals plans to visit Beijing in April [8] Macron to visit China after Beijing's Ukraine peace plan [9] Rallies in French capital call for peace in Ukraine

While Proposing Peace In Ukraine, ... ... China Issues Scathing Tome Over "The Perils Of US Hegemony"

While Proposing Peace In Ukraine, ... ... China Issues Scathing Tome Over "The Perils Of US Hegemony" by Tyler Durden https://www.zerohedge.com (February 25 2023) A massive, 4000-word scathing critique of American foreign policy was circulated by Chinese embassies hosted in Western countries this week, including to American officials and media. It included a lengthy laundry list of US crimes abroad and imperialist tactics. The long essay was first published in state-run Xinhua News agency, and is entitled {1} "US Hegemony and Its Perils". It heavily focuses on Washington's recent wars in the Middle East, which have killed many tens of thousands of people, as well as bullying sanctions on countries like Iran, Venezuela, Cuba, and Russia which have had a strangling effect on entire populations. For a sampling of the kind of rhetoric contained in the essay, which at this point has semi-official status as a Chinese government document (again, given it's being circulated by the Chinese embassy in DC, among others), one section begins: "So far, the United States had or has imposed economic sanctions on nearly 40 countries across the world, including Cuba, China, Russia, the DPRK, Iran, and Venezuela, affecting nearly half of the world's population". https://assets.zerohedge.com/s3fs-public/styles/inline_image_mobile/public/inline-images/ccpcongress.png?itok=zor64caC Via Reuters It repeatedly calls out American hypocrisy and says the US has departed from the very principles it has long espoused and claimed to represent: "The United States of America" has turned itself into "the United States of Sanctions". And "long-arm jurisdiction" has been reduced to nothing but a tool for the United States to use its means of state power to suppress economic competitors and interfere in normal international business. This is a serious departure from the principles of liberal market economy that the United States has long boasted. This also comes the very week that China unveiled a peace plan {2} intended to wind down the Russia-Ukraine war. To be expected, the plan was met with an icy reception in Europe and the US. Below is the Chinese government document in its entirety, which was sent out to Western government officials and media late this week. US Hegemony and Its Perils Contents Introduction I. Political Hegemony - Throwing Its Weight Around II. Military Hegemony - Wanton Use of Force III. Economic Hegemony - Looting and Exploitation IV. Technological Hegemony - Monopoly and Suppression V. Cultural Hegemony - Spreading False Narratives Conclusion Introduction Since becoming the world's most powerful country after the two world wars and the Cold War, the United States has acted more boldly to interfere in the internal affairs of other countries, pursue, maintain and abuse hegemony, advance subversion and infiltration, and willfully wage wars, bringing harm to the international community. The United States has developed a hegemonic playbook to stage "color revolutions", instigate regional disputes, and even directly launch wars under the guise of promoting democracy, freedom and human rights. Clinging to the Cold War mentality, the United States has ramped up bloc politics and stoked conflict and confrontation. It has overstretched the concept of national security, abused export controls and forced unilateral sanctions upon others. It has taken a selective approach to international law and rules, utilizing or discarding them as it sees fit, and has sought to impose rules that serve its own interests in the name of upholding a "rules-based international order". This report, by presenting the relevant facts, seeks to expose the US abuse of hegemony in the political, military, economic, financial, technological and cultural fields, and to draw greater international attention to the perils of the US practices to world peace and stability and the well-being of all peoples. I. Political Hegemony - Throwing Its Weight Around The United States has long been attempting to mold other countries and the world order with its own values and political system in the name of promoting democracy and human rights. ◆ Instances of US interference in other countries' internal affairs abound. In the name of "promoting democracy", the United States practiced a "Neo-Monroe Doctrine" in Latin America, instigated "color revolutions" in Eurasia, and orchestrated the "Arab Spring" in West Asia and North Africa, bringing chaos and disaster to many countries. In 1823, the United States announced the Monroe Doctrine. While touting an "America for the Americans", what it truly wanted was an "America for the United States". Since then, the policies of successive US governments toward Latin America and the Caribbean Region have been riddled with political interference, military intervention and regime subversion. From its 61-year hostility toward and blockade of Cuba to its overthrow of the Allende government of Chile, US policy on this region has been built on one maxim - those who submit will prosper; those who resist shall perish. The year 2003 marked the beginning of a succession of "color revolutions" - the "Rose Revolution" in Georgia, the "Orange Revolution" in Ukraine and the "Tulip Revolution" in Kyrgyzstan. The US Department of State openly admitted playing a "central role" in these "regime changes". The United States also interfered in the internal affairs of the Philippines, ousting President Ferdinand Marcos Sr in 1986 and President Joseph Estrada in 2001 through the so-called "People Power Revolutions". In January 2023, former US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo released his new book Never Give an Inch: Fighting for the America I Love. He revealed in it that the United States had plotted to intervene in Venezuela. The plan was to force the Maduro government to reach an agreement with the opposition, deprive Venezuela of its ability to sell oil and gold for foreign exchange, exert high pressure on its economy, and influence the 2018 presidential election. ◆ The US exercises double standards on international rules. Placing its self-interest first, the United States has walked away from international treaties and organizations, and put its domestic law above international law. In April 2017, the Trump administration announced that it would cut off all US funding to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) with the excuse that the organization "supports, or participates in the management of a programme of coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization". The United States quit UNESCO twice in 1984 and 2017. In 2017, it announced leaving the Paris Agreement on climate change. In 2018, it announced its exit from the UN Human Rights Council, citing the organization's "bias" against Israel and failure to protect human rights effectively. In 2019, the United States announced its withdrawal from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty to seek unfettered development of advanced weapons. In 2020, it announced pulling out of the Treaty on Open Skies. The United States has also been a stumbling block to biological arms control by opposing negotiations on a verification protocol for the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) and impeding international verification of countries' activities relating to biological weapons. As the only country in possession of a chemical weapons stockpile, the United States has repeatedly delayed the destruction of chemical weapons and remained reluctant in fulfilling its obligations. It has become the biggest obstacle to realizing "a world free of chemical weapons". ◆ The United States is piecing together small blocs through its alliance system. It has been forcing an "Indo-Pacific Strategy" onto the Asia-Pacific region, assembling exclusive clubs like the Five Eyes, the Quad and AUKUS, and forcing regional countries to take sides. Such practices are essentially meant to create division in the region, stoke confrontation and undermine peace. ◆ The US arbitrarily passes judgment on democracy in other countries, and fabricates a false narrative of "democracy versus authoritarianism" to incite estrangement, division, rivalry and confrontation. In December 2021, the United States hosted the first "Summit for Democracy", which drew criticism and opposition from many countries for making a mockery of the spirit of democracy and dividing the world. In March 2023, the United States will host another "Summit for Democracy", which remains unwelcome and will again find no support. II. Military Hegemony - Wanton Use of Force The history of the United States is characterized by violence and expansion. Since it gained independence in 1776, the United States has constantly sought expansion by force: it slaughtered Indians, invaded Canada, waged a war against Mexico, instigated the American-Spanish War, and annexed Hawaii. After World War II, the wars either provoked or launched by the United States included the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Gulf War, the Kosovo War, the War in Afghanistan, the Iraq War, the Libyan War and the Syrian War, abusing its military hegemony to pave the way for expansionist objectives. In recent years, the US average annual military budget has exceeded 700 billion US dollars, accounting for 40 percent of the world's total, more than the 15 countries behind it combined. The United States has about 800 overseas military bases, with 173,000 troops deployed in 159 countries. https://twitter.com/upholdreality/status/1628964828847955970 https://twitter.com/upholdreality/status/1628964828847955970 According to the book America Invades: How We've Invaded or been Militarily Involved with almost Every Country on Earth (2015), the United States has fought or been militarily involved with almost all the 190-odd countries recognized by the United Nations with only three exceptions. The three countries were "spared" because the United States did not find them on the map. ◆ As former US President Jimmy Carter put it, the United States is undoubtedly the most warlike nation in the history of the world. According to a Tufts University report, "Introducing the Military Intervention Project: A new Dataset on US Military Interventions, 1776-2019", the United States undertook nearly 400 military interventions globally between those years, 34 percent of which were in Latin America and the Caribbean, 23 percent in East Asia and the Pacific, 14 percent in the Middle East and North Africa, and 13 percent in Europe. Currently, its military intervention in the Middle East and North Africa and sub-Saharan Africa is on the rise. Alex Lo, a South China Morning Post columnist, pointed out that the United States has rarely distinguished between diplomacy and war since its founding. It overthrew democratically elected governments in many developing countries in the 20th century and immediately replaced them with pro-American puppet regimes. Today, in Ukraine, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Pakistan and Yemen, the United States is repeating its old tactics of waging proxy, low-intensity, and drone wars. ◆ US military hegemony has caused humanitarian tragedies. Since 2001, the wars and military operations launched by the United States in the name of fighting terrorism have claimed over 900,000 lives with some 335,000 of them civilians, injured millions and displaced tens of millions. The 2003 Iraq War resulted in some 200,000 to 250,000 civilian deaths, including over 16,000 directly killed by the US military, and left more than a million homeless. The United States has created 37 million refugees around the world. Since 2012, the number of Syrian refugees alone has increased tenfold. Between 2016 and 2019, 33,584 civilian deaths were documented in the Syrian fightings, including 3,833 killed by US-led coalition bombings, half of them women and children. The Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) reported on 9 November 2018 that the air strikes launched by US forces on Raqqa alone killed 1,600 Syrian civilians. The two-decades-long war in Afghanistan devastated the country. A total of 47,000 Afghan civilians and 66,000 to 69,000 Afghan soldiers and police officers unrelated to the September 11 attacks were killed in US military operations, and more than 10 million people were displaced. The war in Afghanistan destroyed the foundation of economic development there and plunged the Afghan people into destitution. After the "Kabul debacle" in 2021, the United States announced that it would freeze some 9.5 billion dollars in assets belonging to the Afghan central bank, a move considered as "pure looting". In September 2022, Turkish Interior Minister Suleyman Soylu commented at a rally that the United States has waged a proxy war in Syria, turned Afghanistan into an opium field and heroin factory, thrown Pakistan into turmoil, and left Libya in incessant civil unrest. The United States does whatever it takes to rob and enslave the people of any country with underground resources. The United States has also adopted appalling methods in war. During the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Gulf War, the Kosovo War, the War in Afghanistan and the Iraq War, the United States used massive quantities of chemical and biological weapons as well as cluster bombs, fuel-air bombs, graphite bombs and depleted uranium bombs, causing enormous damage on civilian facilities, countless civilian casualties and lasting environmental pollution. III. Economic Hegemony - Looting and Exploitation After World War II, the United States led efforts to set up the Bretton Woods System, the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, which, together with the Marshall Plan, formed the international monetary system centered around the US dollar. In addition, the United States has also established institutional hegemony in the international economic and financial sector by manipulating the weighted voting systems, rules and arrangements of international organizations including "approval by 85 percent majority", and its domestic trade laws and regulations. By taking advantage of the dollar's status as the major international reserve currency, the United States is basically collecting "seigniorage" from around the world; and using its control over international organizations, it coerces other countries into serving America's political and economic strategy. ◆ The United States exploits the world's wealth with the help of "seigniorage". It costs only about 17 cents to produce a 100 dollar bill, but other countries had to pony up 100 dollar of actual goods in order to obtain one. It was pointed out more than half a century ago, that the United States enjoyed exorbitant privilege and deficit without tears created by its dollar, and used the worthless paper note to plunder the resources and factories of other nations. ◆ The hegemony of US dollar is the main source of instability and uncertainty in the world economy. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the United States abused its global financial hegemony and injected trillions of dollars into the global market, leaving other countries, especially emerging economies, to pay the price. In 2022, the US Federal Reserve (Fed) ended its ultra-easy monetary policy and turned to aggressive interest rate hike, causing turmoil in the international financial market and substantial depreciation of other currencies such as the Euro, many of which dropped to a 20-year low. As a result, a large number of developing countries were challenged by high inflation, currency depreciation and capital outflows. This was exactly what Nixon's secretary of the treasury John Connally once remarked, with self-satisfaction yet sharp precision, that "the dollar is our currency, but it is your problem". ◆ With its control over international economic and financial organizations, the United States imposes additional conditions to their assistance to other countries. In order to reduce obstacles to US capital inflow and speculation, the recipient countries are required to advance financial liberalization and open up financial markets so that their economic policies would fall in line with America's strategy. According to the Review of International Political Economy, along with the 1,550 debt relief programs extended by the IMF to its 131 member countries from 1985 to 2014, as many as 55,465 additional political conditions had been attached. ◆ The United States willfully suppresses its opponents with economic coercion. In the 1980s, to eliminate the economic threat posed by Japan, and to control and use the latter in service of America's strategic goal of confronting the Soviet Union and dominating the world, the United States leveraged its hegemonic financial power against Japan, and concluded the Plaza Accord. As a result, Yen was pushed up, and Japan was pressed to open up its financial market and reform its financial system. The Plaza Accord dealt a heavy blow to the growth momentum of the Japanese economy, leaving Japan to what was later called "three lost decades". ◆ America's economic and financial hegemony has become a geopolitical weapon. Doubling down on unilateral sanctions and "long-arm jurisdiction", the United States has enacted such domestic laws as the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act, and the Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, and introduced a series of executive orders to sanction specific countries, organizations or individuals. Statistics show that US sanctions against foreign entities increased by 933 percent from 2000 to 2021. The Trump administration alone has imposed more than 3,900 sanctions, which means three sanctions per day. So far, the United States had or has imposed economic sanctions on nearly 40 countries across the world, including Cuba, China, Russia, the DPRK, Iran and Venezuela, affecting nearly half of the world's population. "The United States of America" has turned itself into "the United States of Sanctions". And "long-arm jurisdiction" has been reduced to nothing but a tool for the United States to use its means of state power to suppress economic competitors and interfere in normal international business. This is a serious departure from the principles of liberal market economy that the United States has long boasted. IV. Technological Hegemony - Monopoly and Suppression The United States seeks to deter other countries' scientific, technological and economic development by wielding monopoly power, suppression measures and technology restrictions in high-tech fields. ◆ The United States monopolizes intellectual property in the name of protection. Taking advantage of the weak position of other countries, especially developing ones, on intellectual property rights and the institutional vacancy in relevant fields, the United States reaps excessive profits through monopoly. In 1994, the United States pushed forward the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), forcing the Americanized process and standards in intellectual property protection in an attempt to solidify its monopoly on technology. In the 1980s, to contain the development of Japan's semiconductor industry, the United States launched the "301" investigation, built bargaining power in bilateral negotiations through multilateral agreements, threatened to label Japan as conducting unfair trade, and imposed retaliatory tariffs, forcing Japan to sign the US-Japan Semiconductor Agreement. As a result, Japanese semiconductor enterprises were almost completely driven out of global competition, and their market share dropped from 50 percent to 10 percent. Meanwhile, with the support of the US government, a large number of US semiconductor enterprises took the opportunity and grabbed larger market share. ◆ The United States politicizes, weaponizes technological issues and uses them as ideological tools. Overstretching the concept of national security, the United States mobilized state power to suppress and sanction Chinese company Huawei, restricted the entry of Huawei products into the US market, cut off its supply of chips and operating systems, and coerced other countries to ban Huawei from undertaking local 5G network construction. It even talked Canada into unwarrantedly detaining Huawei's CFO Meng Wanzhou for nearly three years. The United States has fabricated a slew of excuses to clamp down on China's high-tech enterprises with global competitiveness, and has put more than 1,000 Chinese enterprises on sanction lists. In addition, the United States has also imposed controls on biotechnology, artificial intelligence and other high-end technologies, reinforced export restrictions, tightened investment screening, suppressed Chinese social media apps such as TikTok and WeChat, and lobbied the Netherlands and Japan to restrict exports of chips and related equipment or technology to China. The United States has also practiced double standards in its policy on China-related technological professionals. To sideline and suppress Chinese researchers, since June 2018, visa validity has been shortened for Chinese students majoring in certain high-tech-related disciplines, repeated cases have occurred where Chinese scholars and students going to the United States for exchange programs and study were unjustifiably denied and harassed, and large-scale investigation on Chinese scholars working in the United States was carried out. ◆ The United States solidifies its technological monopoly in the name of protecting democracy. By building small blocs on technology such as the "chips alliance" and "clean network", the United States has put "democracy" and "human rights" labels on high-technology, and turned technological issues into political and ideological issues, so as to fabricate excuses for its technological blockade against other countries. In May 2019, the United States enlisted 32 countries to the Prague 5G Security Conference in the Czech Republic and issued the Prague Proposal in an attempt to exclude China's 5G products. In April 2020, then US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced the "5G clean path", a plan designed to build a technological alliance in the 5G field with partners bonded by their shared ideology on democracy and the need to protect "cyber security". The measures, in essence, are the US attempts to maintain its technological hegemony through technological alliances. ◆ The United States abuses its technological hegemony by carrying out cyber attacks and eavesdropping. The United States has long been notorious as an "empire of hackers", blamed for its rampant acts of cyber theft around the world. It has all kinds of means to enforce pervasive cyber attacks and surveillance, including using analog base station signals to access mobile phones for data theft, manipulating mobile apps, infiltrating cloud servers, and stealing through undersea cables. The list goes on. US surveillance is indiscriminate. All can be targets of its surveillance, be they rivals or allies, even leaders of allied countries such as former German Chancellor Angela Merkel and several French Presidents. Cyber surveillance and attacks launched by the United States such as "Prism", "Dirtbox", "Irritant Horn" and "Telescreen Operation" are all proof that the United States is closely monitoring its allies and partners. Such eavesdropping on allies and partners has already caused worldwide outrage. Julian Assange, the founder of Wikileaks, a website that has exposed US surveillance programs, said that "do not expect a global surveillance superpower to act with honor or respect. There is only one rule: there are no rules." V. Cultural Hegemony - Spreading False Narratives The global expansion of American culture is an important part of its external strategy. The United States has often used cultural tools to strengthen and maintain its hegemony in the world. ◆ The United States embeds American values in its products such as movies. American values and lifestyle are a tied product to its movies and TV shows, publications, media content, and programs by government-funded non-profit cultural institutions. It thus shapes a cultural and public opinion space in which American culture reigns and maintains cultural hegemony. In his article "The Americanization of the World", John Yemma, an American scholar, exposed the real weapons in US cultural expansion: Hollywood, the image design factories on Madison Avenue, and the production lines of Mattel Company and Coca-Cola. There are various vehicles the United States uses to keep its cultural hegemony. American movies are the most used; they now occupy more than 70 percent of the world's market share. The United States skilfully exploits its cultural diversity to appeal to various ethnicities. When Hollywood movies descend on the world, they scream the American values tied to them. ◆ American cultural hegemony not only shows itself in "direct intervention", but also in "media infiltration" and as "a trumpet for the world". US-dominated Western media has a particularly important role in shaping global public opinion in favor of US meddling in the internal affairs of other countries. The US government strictly censors all social media companies and demands their obedience. Twitter CEO Elon Musk admitted on 27 December 2022 that all social media platforms work with the US government to censor content, reported Fox Business Network. Public opinion in the United States is subject to government intervention to restrict all unfavorable remarks. Google often makes pages disappear. US Department of Defense manipulates social media. In December 2022, The Intercept, an independent US investigative website, revealed that in July 2017, US Central Command official Nathaniel Kahler instructed Twitter's public policy team to augment the presence of 52 Arabic-language accounts on a list he sent, six of which were to be given priority. One of the six was dedicated to justifying US drone attacks in Yemen, such as by claiming that the attacks were precise and killed only terrorists, not civilians. Following Kahler's directive, Twitter put those Arabic-language accounts on a "white list" to amplify certain messages. ◆The United States practices double standards on the freedom of the press. It brutally suppresses and silences the media of other countries by various means. The United States and Europe bar mainstream Russian media such as Russia Today and Sputnik from their countries. Platforms such as Twitter, Facebook and YouTube openly restrict official accounts of Russia. Netflix, Apple and Google have removed Russian channels and applications from their services and app stores. Unprecedented draconian censorship is imposed on Russia-related contents. ◆The United States abuses its cultural hegemony to instigate "peaceful evolution" in socialist countries. It sets up news media and cultural outfits targeting socialist countries. It pours staggering amounts of public funds into radio and TV networks to support their ideological infiltration, and these mouthpieces bombard socialist countries in dozens of languages with inflammatory propaganda day and night. The United States uses misinformation as a spear to attack other countries, and has built an industrial chain around it: there are groups and individuals making up stories, and peddling them worldwide to mislead public opinion with the support of nearly limitless financial resources. Conclusion While a just cause wins its champion wide support, an unjust one condemns its pursuer to be an outcast. The hegemonic, domineering, and bullying practices of using strength to intimidate the weak, taking from others by force and subterfuge, and playing zero-sum games are exerting grave harm. The historical trends of peace, development, cooperation, and mutual benefit are unstoppable. The United States has been overriding truth with its power and trampling justice to serve self-interest. These unilateral, egoistic and regressive hegemonic practices have drawn growing, intense criticism and opposition from the international community. Countries need to respect each other and treat each other as equals. Big countries should behave in a manner befitting their status and take the lead in pursuing a new model of state-to-state relations featuring dialogue and partnership, not confrontation or alliance. China opposes all forms of hegemonism and power politics, and rejects interference in other countries' internal affairs. The United States must conduct serious soul-searching. It must critically examine what it has done, let go of its arrogance and prejudice, and quit its hegemonic, domineering and bullying practices. Links: {1} https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-02-20/china-blasts-us-for-military-cultural-hegemony-as-ties-sour {2} https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/west-cold-shoulders-chinas-ceasefire-proposal-ukraine NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories. https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/while-proposing-peace-ukraine-china-issues-scathing-tome-over-perils-us-hegemony https://billtotten.wpcomstaging.com/ https://www.ashisuto.co.jp/ --- To unsubscribe: List help:

GOP splitting with Trumpie

Toggle Menu TheHill.com CAMPAIGN Club for Growth donor retreat set to feature DeSantis, Haley and others — but not Trump BY MAX GREENWOOD 02/27/23 02:17 PM ET At least half a dozen current and prospective Republican presidential hopefuls are set to speak at the Club for Growth’s annual donor retreat this week, a list that includes Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley — but not former President Trump. In additional to DeSantis and Haley, the Club will also host former Vice President Mike Pence, Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.), Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu, according to a person familiar with the plans. All of these are seen as possible contenders for the GOP’s 2024 presidential nod. Also speaking at the gathering are Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.), who has ruled out a presidential run, and newly minted White House hopeful Vivek Ramaswamy, a wealthy entrepreneur and conservative activist who announced a campaign for the Republican nomination last week. Two other potential White House candidates, Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, were invited to speak at the donor retreat, but are unable to attend, the person said. The speaking roster means that Trump will be the only already-declared 2024 hopeful not in attendance at the retreat, which is set to take place from Thursday to Saturday in Palm Beach, Fla. The retreat also coincides with the annual Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) near Washington, D.C. Several current and potential presidential hopefuls — including Trump, Haley, Pompeo and Ramaswamy — are set to address that gathering this week. While the retreat will be a notably smaller and more exclusive affair than CPAC, it’s also seen as a prime opportunity for current and would-be candidates to introduce themselves to donors. Still, Trump’s omission from the speaker list at the Club’s annual donors retreat underscores his isolation from a group that he once worked closely with — and one that remains influential in conservative politics. The relationship between Trump and the Club soured last year, and he and the Club backed opposing candidates in the GOP Senate primary in Ohio. Trump’s decision to rescind his endorsement of former Rep. Mo Brooks (R-Ala.) in Alabama’s Republican Senate primary also caused friction between him and the Club, which continued to stand behind Brooks. Biden to go on offensive against Republicans over budget fight in Virginia speech Fresh intel raises questions over COVID origins The Club also released a batch of polling in November, just ahead of Trump’s announcement that he would seek the White House again in 2024, showing DeSantis beating the former president among Republican voters in Iowa and New Hampshire, the two states that will kick off the GOP’s presidential nominating contest next year. Speaking to reporters earlier this month, the Club’s president, David McIntosh, said that while his group would still back Trump if the former president emerges as the GOP nominee, he was concerned about Trump’s prospects of winning a general election in 2024. “I worry when we get into a general election that if Trump’s the nominee, they’re going to be able to take a chunk of Republican votes and deny them because they’re just solidly committed not to vote for Trump,” McIntosh said. Categories: Campaign Loading ... Campaign Biden to go on offensive against Republicans over budget fight in Virginia speech Zero-calorie sweetener popular in keto diets linked to strokes, heart attacks Joaquin Castro undergoes surgery for cancer US Marshals hit with 'major' hack, sensitive data compromised Watchdog highlights US withdrawal blunders that led to collapse of Afghan government The Hill Back to top

GOP more splitting

2024 ELECTION GOP stars flee CPAC A number of big names are skipping the annual conservative gathering, whose chair faces a sexual misconduct lawsuit. Conservative Political Action Conference CPAC Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Orlando, Fla., on Feb. 24, 2022. Jabin Botsford / The Washington Post via Getty Images file SHARE THIS — Feb. 27, 2023, 2:46 PM EST / Updated Feb. 27, 2023, 3:58 PM EST By Natasha Korecki and Jonathan Allen Many of the Republican Party's marquee players — including Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, former Vice President Mike Pence and the top GOP leaders in Congress — will skip this week's Conservative Political Action Conference in Maryland, dealing a significant blow to the annual gathering's stature. The abandonment of CPAC, which runs from Wednesday through Saturday, comes as its chairman, Matt Schlapp, defends himself against a lawsuit alleging that he fondled a male aide to then-Senate candidate Herschel Walker in Georgia in October, without the aide's consent. In a filing in a Virginia court this month, Schlapp's lawyers wrote that he denies having committed sexual battery. Despite the mass exodus, the party's most dominant figure — former President Donald Trump — plans to speak at the conference late Saturday afternoon, according to his spokesman, Steven Cheung. Someone said to me, 'We all wanted an excuse not to go, and Schlapp gave it to us.' — A GOP OPERATIVE ABOUT CPAC None of the politicians declining to attend have cited the allegations as the reason for their absence, but several Republicans who spoke on the condition of anonymity said it is a factor in the broader movement away from the conference. A source familiar with Pence's decision did not say it was based on the lawsuit against Schlapp but added, "Most principals are increasing their distance because of that, because of those allegations." Another source whose clients had previously attended the conference said they have specifically cited the Schlapp allegation as a reason they wanted to distance themselves this year. There is a sense among some Republicans that the conference was becoming more of a chore in recent years, said a veteran GOP operative who is not attending this year and asked to remain anonymous to speak candidly. “Someone said to me, ‘We all wanted an excuse not to go, and Schlapp gave it to us,’” the operative said. DeSantis, who has been in demand across the country as he appears to be gearing up for a potential 2024 presidential campaign launch, will be in Texas for GOP dinners in Houston and Dallas, as well as in California. “He will not be at CPAC,” the source with knowledge of the schedule said Monday. The list of luminaries skipping CPAC is long and prestigious: Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy of California, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin are among them. A person familiar with the plans of McDaniel, who has spoken at CPAC before, declined to elaborate on the reason for her absence this year. In the past, the RNC has also been listed as a sponsor of CPAC; this year, it is not. McConnell, notably, has not attended the event in recent years. The crowd booed him in 2021, when former President Donald Trump took a dig at him in his CPAC speech. Recommended 2024 ELECTION Rep. Elissa Slotkin announces 2024 bid for Senate in Michigan McCarthy will be out of town, an aide said. The person familiar with Pence's decision said: "There’s been a distance between the two entities for a few years now. ... Principles and values no longer align.” The conference has long been a way for GOP politicians and movement leaders to reach a large conservative activist crowd — and all the media attention that comes with it. In recent years, it has been the Trump show. Still, some had speculated that DeSantis could parachute in at the last moment, given a recent penchant to show he can operate on Trump turf. That will not be happening, however. DeSantis did speak at CPAC last year, when it was in Florida. Pence has not attended since 2020. Both Schlapp and his wife, Mercedes Schlapp, are named in the lawsuit, which includes allegations that they participated in smearing the man who accuses Matt Schlapp of sexual misconduct. "As stated in court filings of February 9, 2023, the Schlapps deny the plaintiff’s allegations," said Mark Corrallo, a spokesman for the Schlapps. "We will not comment on matters currently pending before the court in Virginia." Former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley, who recently launched her presidential 2024 bid, still plans to attend, an aide confirmed. Other speakers on the agenda include Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, former Arizona gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake and Rep. Elise Stefanik of New York. The conservative Club for Growth will hold its annual donor retreat in Florida this week at the same time. DeSantis, Pence, Haley and others are scheduled to speak at that event; Trump is not. Natasha Korecki Natasha Korecki is a senior national political reporter for NBC News. Jonathan Allen Jonathan Allen is a senior national politics reporter for NBC News, based in Washington. Sahil Kapur, Gary Grumbach , Garrett Haake, Henry J. Gomez and Liz Brown-Kaiser contributed.

Fake nursing degrees. (Photo illustration: Kelli R. Grant/Yahoo News; photos: Getty Images) Fake nursing degrees. (Photo illustration: Kelli R. Grant/Yahoo News; photos: Getty Images) More than 7,600 aspiring nurses cheated the health care system and obtained fraudulent nursing degrees from three South Florida nursing schools, according to federal authorities, in a scheme health care professionals say could undermine trust in the profession. Some 2,600 of those individuals used fake diplomas to take the nursing board exam (NCLEX) and passed, giving them access to work in health care facilities across the country. The diplomas were issued by Siena College in Broward County, the Palm Beach School of Nursing in Palm Beach County and Sacred Heart International Institute in Broward County — all of which are now closed. Though the scheme involved Florida schools, it affected multiple states. “I'm in South Florida. It's a hotbed of fraud, whether it's identity fraud, or PPP fraud, and health care fraud, but this is something that we have not seen before,” Fernando Porras, assistant special agent in charge, told Yahoo News. Porras is leading the oversight investigation for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The investigation, known as Operation Nightingale, found that the national scheme began in 2016 and ended in 2021, accumulating more than $100 million. “We sent in — on several occasions — undercover agents to purchase these degrees as they were explained to us and they were able to purchase the degrees having no medical background or having taken any course —they just paid the amount [$17,000],” Porras explained. On Jan. 25, the U.S. Attorney's Office of the Southern District of Florida indicted 25 individuals in Delaware, New York, New Jersey, Texas and Florida who were allegedly working as recruiters for the illegal licensing scheme. “You don't just wake up one morning and find out that the Palm Beach School of Nursing [or Siena College and Sacred Heart International Institute] is issuing fake degrees. You don't see that publicized in an infomercial. You find out about it because you are told by a recruiter,” Porras said. The 25 defendants are each facing up to 20 years in prison for allegedly participating in a wire fraud scene that created the shortcuts for thousands to receive bogus nursing diplomas. According to Porras, the Florida schools that were issuing the fake diplomas were once “legitimate schools.” “They were certified by the state of Florida to provide nursing degrees,” he said. “They got to a point that their passing rate was dismal. And so they were put on probation. And then shortly after, their certification was revoked. So once they were revoked, and they could no longer issue any diplomas, "they would back-date the attendance of these students. So, let's say they were revoked in 2019; then they would issue the certificate and the diploma as if the student had attended between 2016 and 2017." Now, state licensing boards nationwide have annulled the licenses of dozens of nurses who were practicing with fake degrees. In November, Delaware revoked 26 licenses of nurses tied to the scheme, but officials say there could still be more nurses who need to be let go. “We have heard accounts of additional individuals that have been sent to the Board of Nursing for investigation regarding concern with attendance at those [three South Florida] schools,” Christopher Otto, executive director of the Delaware Nursing Association, told Yahoo News. And some of the individuals who obtained illegal registered nursing (RN) degrees were already licensed practical nurses (LPNs). “For those individuals, their RN or registered nurse license is the one that is annulled. But if they have met the licensing requirements to practice as an LPN, that LPN license is still, in most cases, active,” Otto said. In Georgia, 22 working nurses obtained fake licenses and diplomas. According to local Atlanta TV station WSB-TV, the Georgia Board of Nursing sent letters to the nurses asking them to surrender their fraudulent nursing licenses on Jan 17, but they haven't yet. Yahoo News was not able to immediately reach the board for comment. Brenda Hage, the director of nursing at Florida Gulf Coast University, which is about two hours away from the South Florida schools that were shut down, told Yahoo News that the scheme is offensive to real nurses. “I think I feel more dismayed than surprised,” Hage said. “We work so hard as nurses to be credible and to be viewed as ethical by the patients that we care for, and then when somebody tries to game the system, or do something illegal like this, it really offends and concerns all nurses.” But Hage said her biggest concern is the individuals who passed the national nursing board exam (NCLEX) without the proper education or training. “This creates a false sense of information to the public, that somehow it's really easy to sit for the NCLEX exam to become a licensed registered nurse, and nothing can be further from the truth,” Hage said. According to Hage, the NCLEX exam is rigorous and usually takes up to five hours to complete. “This is not something that you can bypass,” Jennifer Kennedy, the president of the American Nurses Association, told Yahoo News. But Kennedy says she is not surprised that a scandal like this occurred in the health care industry because some states have cut their regulatory requirements. “So we're hoping through this scandal that we can leverage this and can restore some of the authority that legislatures have stripped from boards of nursing throughout this country,” Kennedy said. A recent Gallup poll found that over 79% of U.S adults believe nurses have very high honesty and ethical standards compared with more than a dozen other professions. But now health care officials say the degree scandal will push them to win back Americans' trust. “We have to reassure the public that this has been dealt with. We'll monitor for harm, and I can’t guarantee it, but we'll do everything possible to prevent it from happening again,” Otto said. So far there have been no reports of patient harm from the nurses with fake degrees, and none of the fake nurses have been charged. “Just because an error or an adverse outcome wasn't reported doesn't mean that there weren't any misses,” Hage said. “I think they should be charged. The fact that they knew that this was a fraudulent practice, and they engaged in fraud, makes them culpable.” Health care officials say the years-long scheme is unprecedented and could have affected anyone who visits a health care facility. “This case potentially could affect any one of us — we go to emergency rooms, we have loved ones in hospice, in skilled nursing facilities, that can potentially be receiving care from someone that is not properly trained,” Porras said.