China-US Standoff: The “Tit-for-Tat” enterprise continues

The US President calls the Corona Virus or COVID19, the “Chinese Virus”. While the Chinese comes with an conspiracy of US intervention and making up the virus itself. This is a common practice of deflections and also disinformation practices of parties that doesn’t want to take responsibility and also deflect their own inability to cape with the new problems at hand. Than, its easier to blame another party or make a make-belief story.

However, Trump dumb arrogance and ignorant attitude shouldn’t shape the world. Neither should the Communist party and their propaganda shape the world either. Nevertheless, we got to listen to them both and glean through it all, as we are all settled on this earth and got to live together on this planet.

Last month, the White House and Trump administrations put some new limits on the Chinese media houses in the United States. The 5 Chinese Media had to register itself and its employees. The Trump Administration also planned to limit the visas to the Chinese journalists in the US. These were targeting the Chinese media like Xinhua News Agency and China Global Television Network (CGTN).

This month and today, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China wrote this: “First, in response to the US designation of five Chinese media agencies as “foreign missions”, China demands, in the spirit of reciprocity, that the China-based branches of Voice of America, the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post and Time declare in written form information about their staff, finance, operation and real estate in China. Second, in response to the US slashing the staff size of Chinese media outlets in the US, which is expulsion in all but name, China demands that journalists of US citizenship working with the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal and the Washington Post whose press credentials are due to expire before the end of 2020 notify the Department of Information of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs within four calendar days starting from today and hand back their press cards within ten calendar days. They will not be allowed to continue working as journalists in the People’s Republic of China, including its Hong Kong and Macao Special Administrative Regions. Third, in response to the discriminatory restrictions the US has imposed on Chinese journalists with regard to visa, administrative review and reporting, China will take reciprocal measures against American journalists” (China, 17.03.2020).

We are now seeing a return of the favour, which is a way of using the same means of retribution. When one does this, I do that. When my brother steal my coke, I take his Pepsi and so-on. This is what is happening, the Chinese targets US media houses and the US targets Chinese media houses. In this regard none of them wins.

They are both stopping transparent reporting and also outsider looking in. No matter what sort of ideals you got. This is a diplomatic dispute between two parties. Who both seek to revenge. Who both uses this means on journalists and the media houses. While there are some underlying conflict between them. Stemming from the trade-war or the tariffs, maybe even the rhetoric of the Trump Presidency or the CCP Party officials. Because none of them are winning at this, only loosing.

This is just political mind-games with the usage of the media as the pawns. It is right to question the Chinese media houses and their affiliation with the ruling party. However, the US media houses have often played the tunes of the ruling regime and been the voice of whoever in-charge there too. Not so all to critical or questioning the status quo. That is why, this is more a question of imperialism and whose on first. Than whose the big bad wolf.

Yes, this here isn’t the whole story, there are more to glean into it. However, the stories shared from China wouldn’t have been uncovered by their own. Unless, they had more brave whistleblowers and such. Who dares to speak out, but not like there are so many big voices who doesn’t follow the corporate government agenda of Washington either? Who is in the mainstream media there and whose critical abroad, but a nice acting puppy at home.

Well, that is my take on it. You might not like it, but this is view of an outsider looking in. They are both playing each other. There are no innocent here. Both have their own agenda, not just trying to cover one side or another. They want to undress each other and uses all means.

This was a “tit-for-tat”. Let’s see where this one goes, but this is not last card in the deck. There comes more. Peace.

The historical call between Kissinger and Marder: Shows how the NSA became a WaPo source!

In December 12, 1972 there was a unique phone call between Journalist Murray Marder at the Washington Post and the then National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger under President Richard Nixon. Here we can see allegations from the Washington Post and the Nixon Government warfare in Vietnam. How it is explained and how the sudden approach of Marder get the truth and also get Kissinger to explain the situation, instead of getting angry and stop listening to press. Something, today’s government should learn, since this is not stopping the spin, but explaining the facts. Also, come forward. We are even seeing that Kissinger went to become “government source”, instead of being named in paper. Just take a look!

Let me show you pieces of the conservation between Marder and Kissinger to give some context:

Kissinger: Yes, Murray.

Marder: Henry —-

Kissinger: Not that goddamn paper deserves a return call

Marder: Ah, you mean the editorial or me or what?

Kissinger: The Editorial. No you’ve been 80 % rational. But for a newspaper that’s accusing us of not showing enough goodwill; now to accuse us of naivety is almost more than one’s morality can stand. But go ahead, you’re not responsible for the editorial”

He later continues:

Marder: This is what I wanted to get at because the Press Office response was it was untrue that Kissinger asked for 126 charges. But we said, well, we thought it was too much because that leaves the question: “well, was it 125 or was it anything or was it –”

Kissinger: The last day we asked for none whatsoever. You know, I don’t know how the sons-of-bitches are counting – they might, during the course of 15 days, if they count every word that was ever suggested in these discussions, they might amount to something, I don’t know. We did not – – there were never more than 8 points seriously at issue at any time during the 15 days. All of this is off-the-record”

Later again:

Marder: Which I’m not trying to do obviously because of this is the kind of thing you get a sweeping accusation from somebody of 126 charges.

Kissinger: The major issue that was discussed occurred in one place and did not recur through the document.

Marder: um-humm.

Kissinger: It is just not true.

Marder: Right.

Kissinger: You know, it might be hard to accept it. The U.S. Government may be telling the truth and Hanoi may be lying but it’s just barely conceivable.

Marder: No, the question here was just simple the way the way he is slinging the 126 around, it was obvious to anybody following this that there are not 126 charges probably in the entire agreement in any substantive form and he has gone on to say that – –

Kissinger: Look, can anybody really believe that having negotiated the Berlin agreement, the Shanghai communique, the SALT agreement, that one could be so wrong at the end of October as to think that 126 issues could be settled in three or four days?

Marder: No, I would think absolutely not.

Kissinger: Or is it more likely that we raised exactly the issues that I mentioned at the end of October? Issues on the assumption of a decisions to settle are easy. And on the assumption of a decision not to settle become insoluble.

Marder: Yeah, yes. I would have no problem with that”

Later in the conversation:

Marder: What is not clear to me is do you see a probability of them dumping everything into that record? That would mean a break and everything if they would go that far.

Kissinger: They wouldn’t do that; they wouldn’t look to good.

Marder: I would think there is a limit. The point is that they probably do not want to break off the negotiations but want to register some great indignation and dismay and generate whatever support pressures from China and Moscow to support them there.

Kissinger: I think that’s right. Murray, I’ve got to run but will you write this please by keeping White House or anybody else out of it.

Marder: All right but I must use something – – Administration sources said the charge of 126 has no foundation whatsoever.

Kissinger: That’s right”

Finally:

Marder: This is why I called you because the White House thing left that hanging.

Kissinger: Hell, it wasn’t anything like 10. I mean, in fact, only 10 things that were ever seriously discussed.

Marder: Right.

Kissinger: There may be a lot of things but all of this is basically irrelevant because all of those issues have in fact practically been settled.

Marder: Right, right. Just one brief thing, the timing discernible at all on any next move on their part?

Kissinger: I have no estimate on that.

Marder: Um-humm.

Kissinger: Okay, Murray.

Marder: Thank you, Henry.

Kissinger: Right. Tell ______ that I deeply appreciate his editorial.

Marder: I will”

If you see how the conservation was between the National Security Advisor and Washington Post Journalist. Shows how the political game is played and what efforts being made. How it went from I hate that editorial, to I appreciate it. Certainly, politician will act first in defense and say the papers are wrong. But when he changed and listened to Kissinger, the story got altered and the information being given made sense. So it wasn’t a spin. Maybe, the White House of today could learn from it today.

Annonsen til Roberto Manchini!

Lurer på hva tenker på når du ser på denne? Tre tittler er visst ikke nok for eierne av Machester City. Sjeikene har nok allerede ordnet seg med Pellegrini fra Malaga. Få se hva som skjer! Hva tror du?

Annonsen ble gitt ut i London Evening Standard, Washington Post og Beijing Bugle. Ikke i Manchester Evening Newss hvor faktisk Manchester City fansen kanskje hadde kjøpt den avisen og ikke minst sett annonsen.

Uansett, framtiden til klubben er spennende. Jeg lurer på selv hvordan dette bytte vil ha å bety for klubben og ligaen. Akkurat som spenningsmomentet med Alex Ferguson som har lagt opp som manager i Manchester United. Manchester United som har ordnet seg med Moyes fra Everton som erstatter, men det visste hele verden! Hele forbaska verden!

Peace.