Archive for September, 2011

Noda, Aquino agree to counter China sea claims [Japan Times]

Posted in Beijing, China, Japan, Malaysia, Philippines, South China Sea, Taiwan, Vietnam on September 30, 2011 by Zuo Shou / 左手

Sept. 28, 2011

Staff writer

Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda and Philippines President Benigno Aquino III agreed Tuesday in Tokyo to forge closer maritime security ties to resolve disputes with China in the South China Sea.

China and the Philippines have experienced heightened tensions over the Spratly Islands, which are believed to lie on top of vast oil deposits. They are also claimed by Vietnam, Taiwan, Malaysia and Brunei.

Tokyo and Beijing are engaged in a territorial row of their own over the Senkaku Islands in the East China Sea.

Tuesday’s agreement could irk China…

…Japan is the Philippines’ top trade partner and largest donor. The[ir] joint statement underlined the importance of the joint economic partnership agreement between the two nations that went into effect in 2008…

Article link:


China picks Zhang Yimou’s “The Flowers of War” for Oscar competition [Film Business Asia / Sweet & Sour Cinema]

Posted in Sweet & Sour Cinema, Zhang Yimou 张艺谋 on September 30, 2011 by Zuo Shou / 左手

By Patrick Frater and Stephen Cremin

Sat, 24 September 2011

* Excerpted *

China has made the widely-anticipated and potentially controversial decision to submit ZHANG Yimou 張藝謀’s The Flowers of War 金陵十三釵 as its contender for the foreign-language Oscar…

…Inspired by true events in 1937 Nanjing, the film stars Christian Bale as an American who pretends to be a priest to hold the middle ground between the occupying Japanese army, the city’s besieged citizens, and two groups of schoolgirls and prostitutes who occupy a cathedral.

[The film is s]cheduled to open in China on 16 Dec 2011…sources close to the film said that, although they have not yet signed a distributor, the producers were aiming for a North American theatrical release timed as close as possible to the Chinese release in mid-December.

If it is given a seven day release in Los Angeles County before the end of December, it would open Flowers to potential nominations in other categories in 2011. If it misses that deadline, Flowers will not be eligible in subsequent years.

Five films by Zhang have previously been submitted to the foreign-language category: Red Sorghum 紅高粱 (1987), Ju Dou 菊豆 (1990), Hero 英雄 (2002), House of Flying Daggers 十面埋伏 (2004) and Curse Of The Golden Flower 滿城盡帶黃金甲 (2006).

Edited by Zuo Shou; original article title “China picks Flowers for Oscar”

Full article link:

Commentary: Push for China currency bill based on an error [People’s Daily]

Posted in Bourgeois parliamentary democracy, Capitalism crisis early 21st century, China, China-bashing, China-US relations, Currency wars, Dalian, Early 21st Century global capitalist financial crisis' US origins, Economic crisis & decline, Economy, Obama, Premier Wen Jiabao, USA, Yuan appreciation on September 30, 2011 by Zuo Shou / 左手

By Xia Wenhui (Xinhua)

BEIJING, Sept. 16 (Xinhua) — U.S. Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid’s recent drive for a bill aimed at forcing up the Chinese currency erroneously links the yuan to his country’s depressed job market.

Reid may argue an undervalued yuan has cost many U.S. manufacturing jobs by giving China’s factories unfair advantages.

It’s easy for U.S. lawmakers to blame the huge U.S. trade deficit on China, which hit 273 billion U.S. dollars in 2010, when they search for reasons why more Americans cannot get jobs and are unhappy with the economic situation.

But Reid cannot deny the fact that the key reason for the current 9.1 percent unemployment rate is the lagging U.S. economy, which has no immediate link with the yuan.

Many analysts have agreed with this point. Phillip Swagel, a scholar with the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, has said a sharp appreciation of the yuan will only lead to an increase of 30 percent in U.S. commodities prices, adding more interest costs for government, enterprises and citizens.

A stronger yuan would not fundamentally change the structural problems that existed in the U.S. economy, such as unemployment and the trade deficit, said Swagel, who is also a former assistant secretary for economic policy at the U.S. Treasury Department.

Moreover, a mutually beneficial trade and economic relationship between the United States and China conforms to the common interests of the two countries.

As bilateral trade reached 285.65 billion dollars in the past eight months, Reid should agree that a stronger U.S.-China trade relationship in the past three decades has brought vast job opportunities for the two nations.

A sharp appreciation of the yuan will only deal a grave blow to China’s foreign trade and hurt its economy. And a volatile Chinese market will not help U.S. President Barack Obama’s ambition to dramatically boost U.S. exports to China.

Now with Obama asking the Congress to pass a jobs-creation package to cut tax and raise money, the White House is trying to boost growth and find more chances for trade and manufacturing.

For Beijing, a better economic relationship with the United States means smooth trade and strong support of the economy, especially when the world is on the edge of new economic turmoil.

Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao said Wednesday at the World Economic Forum Summer Davos meeting in northeast China’s port city of Dalian that China was willing to boost financial and economic cooperation with the United States and an open U.S. market and robust exports should be better options for both countries.

For the United States, lowering its barrier for investment and loosening its controls on exports to China would be more helpful than forcing the yuan’s revaluation.

Reid was no more than playing politics when he pushed the China currency bill in Congress, not the first time in recent years. The move will do no good for either the Chinese or the U.S. economies.

Article link:

“Libya and the world we live in” by William Blum []

Posted in Afghanistan, Africa, Bahrain, Cameron, China, CIA, Corporate Media Critique, Egypt, EU, European Union, France, Germany, India, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Libya, Media smear campaign, NATO, Obama, Pentagon, Qatar, Russia, Sarkozy, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Tunisia, U.K., US imperialism, USA, War crimes, Wikileaks, Yemen on September 30, 2011 by Zuo Shou / 左手

Sept. 1, 2011

“Why are you attacking us? Why are you killing our children? Why are you destroying our infrastructure?”
– Television address by Libyan Leader Muammar Gaddafi, April 30, 2011

A few hours later NATO hit a target in Tripoli, killing Gaddafi’s 29-year-old son Saif al-Arab, three of Gaddafi’s grandchildren, all under twelve years of age, and several friends and neighbors.

In his TV address, Gaddafi had appealed to the NATO nations for a cease-fire and negotiations after six weeks of bombings and cruise missile attacks against his country.

Well, let’s see if we can derive some understanding of the complex Libyan turmoil.

The Holy Triumvirate — The United States, NATO and the European Union — recognizes no higher power and believes, literally, that it can do whatever it wants in the world, to whomever it wants, for as long as it wants, and call it whatever it wants, like “humanitarian”.

If The Holy Triumvirate decides that it doesn’t want to overthrow the government in Syria or in Egypt or Tunisia or Bahrain or Saudi Arabia or Yemen or Jordan, no matter how cruel, oppressive, or religiously intolerant those governments are with their people, no matter how much they impoverish and torture their people, no matter how many protesters they shoot dead in their Freedom Square, the Triumvirate will simply not overthrow them.

If the Triumvirate decides that it wants to overthrow the government of Libya, though that government is secular and has used its oil wealth for the benefit of the people of Libya and Africa perhaps more than any government in all of Africa and the Middle East, but keeps insisting over the years on challenging the Triumvirate’s imperial ambitions in Africa and raising its demands on the Triumvirate’s oil companies, then the Triumvirate will simply overthrow the government of Libya.

If the Triumvirate wants to punish Gaddafi and his sons it will arrange with the Triumvirate’s friends at the International Criminal Court to issue arrest warrants for them.

If the Triumvirate doesn’t want to punish the leaders of Syria, Egypt, Tunisia, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Jordan it will simply not ask the ICC to issue arrest warrants for them. Ever since the Court first formed in 1998, the United States has refused to ratify it and has done its best to denigrate it and throw barriers in its way because Washington is concerned that American officials might one day be indicted for their many war crimes and crimes against humanity. Bill Richardson, as US ambassador to the UN, said to the world in 1998 that the United States should be exempt from the court’s prosecution because it has “special global responsibilities”. But this doesn’t stop the United States from using the Court when it suits the purposes of American foreign policy.

If the Triumvirate wants to support a rebel military force to overthrow the government of Libya then it does not matter how fanatically religious, al-Qaeda-related,1 executing-beheading-torturing, monarchist, or factionally split various groups of that rebel force are at times, the Triumvirate will support it, as it did certain forces in Afghanistan and Iraq, and hope that after victory the Libyan force will not turn out as jihadist as it did in Afghanistan, or as fratricidal as in Iraq. One potential source of conflict within the rebels, and within the country if ruled by them, is that a constitutional declaration made by the rebel council states that, while guaranteeing democracy and the rights of non-Muslims, “Islam is the religion of the state and the principle source of legislation in Islamic Jurisprudence.”2

Adding to the list of the rebels’ charming qualities we have the Amnesty International report that the rebels have been conducting mass arrests of black people across the nation, terming all of them “foreign mercenaries” but with growing evidence that a large number were simply migrant workers. Reported Reuters (August 29): “On Saturday, reporters saw the putrefying bodies of 22 men of African origin on a Tripoli beach. Volunteers who had come to bury them said they were mercenaries whom rebels had shot dead.” To complete this portrait of the West’s newest darlings we have this report from The Independent of London (August 27): “The killings were pitiless. They had taken place at a makeshift hospital, in a tent marked clearly with the symbols of the Islamic crescent. Some of the dead were on stretchers, attached to intravenous drips. Some were on the back of an ambulance that had been shot at. A few were on the ground, seemingly attempting to crawl to safety when the bullets came.”

If the Triumvirate’s propaganda is clever enough and deceptive enough and paints a graphic picture of Gaddafi-initiated high tragedy in Libya, many American and European progressives will insist that though they never, ever support imperialism they’re making an exception this time because …

The Libyan people are being saved from a “massacre”, both actual and potential. This massacre, however, seems to have been grossly exaggerated by the Triumvirate, al Jazeera TV, and that station’s owner, the government of Qatar; and nothing approaching reputable evidence of a massacre has been offered, neither a mass grave or anything else; the massacre stories appear to be on a par with the Viagra-rape stories spread by al Jazeera (the Fox News of the Libyan uprising). Qatar, it should be noted, has played an active military role in the civil war on the side of NATO. It should be further noted that the main massacre in Libya has been six months of daily Triumvirate bombing, killing an unknown number of people and ruining much of the infrastructure. Michigan U. Prof. Juan Cole, the quintessential true-believer in the good intentions of American foreign policy who nevertheless manages to have a regular voice in progressive media, recently wrote that “Qaddafi was not a man to compromise … his military machine would mow down the revolutionaries if it were allowed to.” Is that clear, class? We all know of course that Sarkozy, Obama, and Cameron made compromises without end in their devastation of Libya; they didn’t, for example, use any nuclear weapons.
The United Nations gave its approval for military intervention; i.e., the leading members of the Triumvirate gave their approval, after Russia and China cowardly abstained instead of exercising their veto power; (perhaps hoping to receive the same courtesy from the US, UK and France when Russia or China is the aggressor nation).
The people of Libya are being “liberated”, whatever in the world that means, now or in the future. Gaddafi is a “dictator” they insist. That may indeed be the proper term to use for the man, but it must still be asked: Is he a relatively benevolent dictator or is he the other kind so favored by Washington? It must also be asked: Since the United States has habitually supported dictators for the entire past century, why not this one?

The Triumvirate, and its fawning media, would have the world believe that what’s happened in Libya is just another example of the Arab Spring, a popular uprising by non-violent protestors against a dictator for the proverbial freedom and democracy, spreading spontaneously from Tunisia and Egypt, which sandwich Libya. But there are several reasons to question this analysis in favor of seeing the Libyan rebels’ uprising as a planned and violent attempt to take power in behalf of their own political movement, however heterogeneous that movement might appear to be in its early stage. For example:

* They soon began flying the flag of the monarchy that Gaddafi had overthrown

* They were an armed and violent rebellion almost from the beginning; within a few days, we could read of “citizens armed with weapons seized from army bases”3 and of “the policemen who had participated in the clash were caught and hanged by protesters”4

* Their revolt took place not in the capital but in the heart of the country’s oil region; they then began oil production and declared that foreign countries would be rewarded oil-wise in relation to how much each country aided their cause
* They soon set up a Central Bank, a rather bizarre thing for a protest movement

* International support came quickly, even beforehand, from Qatar and al Jazeera to the CIA and French intelligence

The notion that a leader does not have the right to put down an armed rebellion against the state is too absurd to discuss.

Not very long ago, Iraq and Libya were the two most modern and secular states in the Mideast/North Africa world with perhaps the highest standards of living in the region. Then the United States of America came along and saw fit to make a basket case of each one. The desire to get rid of Gaddafi had been building for years; the Libyan leader had never been a reliable pawn; then the Arab Spring provided the excellent opportunity and cover. As to Why? Take your pick of the following:

* Gaddafi’s plans to conduct Libya’s trading in Africa in raw materials and oil in a new currency — the gold African dinar, a change that could have delivered a serious blow to the US’s dominant position in the world economy. (In 2000, Saddam Hussein announced Iraqi oil would be traded in euros, not dollars; sanctions and an invasion followed.) For further discussion see here.

* A host-country site for Africom, the US Africa Command, one of six regional commands the Pentagon has divided the world into. Many African countries approached to be the host have declined, at times in relatively strong terms. Africom at present is headquartered in Stuttgart, Germany. According to a State Department official: “We’ve got a big image problem down there. … Public opinion is really against getting into bed with the US. They just don’t trust the US.”5

* An American military base to replace the one closed down by Gaddafi after he took power in 1969. There’s only one such base in Africa, in Djibouti. Watch for one in Libya sometime after the dust has settled. It’ll perhaps be situated close to the American oil wells. Or perhaps the people of Libya will be given a choice — an American base or a NATO base.

* Another example of NATO desperate to find a raison d’être for its existence since the end of the Cold War and the Warsaw Pact.

* Gaddafi’s role in creating the African Union. The corporate bosses never like it when their wage slaves set up a union. The Libyan leader has also supported a United States of Africa for he knows that an Africa of 54 independent states will continue to be picked off one by one and abused and exploited by the members of the Triumvirate. Gaddafi has moreover demanded greater power for smaller countries in the United Nations.

* The claim by Gaddafi’s son, Saif el Islam, that Libya had helped to fund Nicolas Sarkozy’s election campaign6 could have humiliated the French president and explain his obsessiveness and haste in wanting to be seen as playing the major role in implementing the “no fly zone” and other measures against Gaddafi. A contributing factor may have been the fact that France has been weakened in its former colonies and neo-colonies in Africa and the Middle East, due in part to Gaddafi’s influence.

* Gaddafi has been an outstanding supporter of the Palestinian cause and critic of Israeli policies; and on occasion has taken other African and Arab countries, as well as the West, to task for their not matching his policies or rhetoric; one more reason for his lack of popularity amongst world leaders of all stripes.

* In January, 2009, Gaddafi made known that he was considering nationalizing the foreign oil companies in Libya.7 He also has another bargaining chip: the prospect of utilizing Russian, Chinese and Indian oil companies. During the current period of hostilities, he invited these countries to make up for lost production. But such scenarios will now not take place. The Triumvirate will instead seek to privatize the National Oil Corporation, transferring Libya’s oil wealth into foreign hands.

* The American Empire is troubled by any threat to its hegemony. In the present historical period the empire is concerned mainly with Russia and China. China has extensive energy investments and construction investments in Libya and elsewhere in Africa. The average American neither knows nor cares about this. The average American imperialist cares greatly, if for no other reason than in this time of rising demands for cuts to the military budget it’s vital that powerful “enemies” be named and maintained.

For yet more reasons, see the article “Why Regime Change in Libya?” by Ismael Hossein-zadeh, and the US diplomatic cables released by Wikileaks — Wikileaks reference 07TRIPOLI967 11-15-07 (includes a complaint about Libyan “resource nationalism”)

Article link, has footnote references:

Majorities’ negative views of press climb in US; Federal Gov’t, Business perceived as even more untrustworthy [Pew Research Center]

Posted in Corporate Media Critique, Obama, Pew Research Center, USA on September 30, 2011 by Zuo Shou / 左手

Views of the News Media: 1985-2011


* Overview *

Negative opinions about the performance of news organizations now equal or surpass all-time highs on nine of 12 core measures the Pew Research Center has been tracking since 1985…

The Pew Research Center for the People & the Press has been tracking views of press performance since 1985, and the overall ratings remain quite negative. Fully 66% say news stories often are inaccurate, 77% think that news organizations tend to favor one side, and 80% say news organizations are often influenced by powerful people and organizations.

The widely-shared belief that news stories are inaccurate cuts to the press’s core mission: Just 25% say that in general news organizations get the facts straight while 66% say stories are often inaccurate. As recently as four years ago, 39% said news organizations mostly get the facts straight and 53% said stories are often inaccurate…

…By comparison, about half say they have a lot or some trust in information provided by their state government (51%) and the Obama administration (50%). Smaller percentages trust information from federal agencies (44%), business corporations (41%), Congress (37%) or candidates running for office (29%)….

Edited by Zuo Shou

Original article link, with stats and graphs:

Original article title: “Press Widely Criticized, But Trusted More than Other Information Sources “

“Backgrounder: China’s voyage to space: from Shenzhou-1 to Tiangong-1” – as space station module successfully launched [Xinhua]

Posted in China, USA, USSR on September 30, 2011 by Zuo Shou / 左手

BEIJING, Sept. 29 (Xinhua) — China is scheduled to heave its first space laboratory module Tiangong-1 skyward Thursday evening, a major step closer to its first space station since it started its manned space program in 1992.

The 8.5-tonne Tiangong-1, with a length of 10.4 meters and maximum diameter of 3.35 meters, is scheduled to be launched by the Long March-2FT1 carrier rocket between 13:16 and 13:31 GMT at the Jiuquan Satellite Launch Center in northwest China.

China will conduct its first space docking test after the launch of the Shenzhou-8 unmanned spacecraft, which is scheduled in November.

The main task of the Tiangong-1 flight is to experiment in rendezvous and docking between spacecraft and accumulate experience for developing a space station.

It’s been 12 years since the program’s first mission took place in 1999 via the launch of the Shenzhou-1.

The following are some facts about China’s manned space program.


Launch time: 6:30 a.m., Nov. 20, 1999

Landing time: 3:41 a.m., Nov. 21, 1999

The main task was to examine the performance and reliability of the launcher and verify key technologies relating to capsule connection and separation, heat prevention, control, and landing.


Launch time: 1:00:03 a.m., Jan. 10, 2001

Landing time: 7:22 p.m., Jan. 16, 2001

Shenzhou-2 was the first formal unmanned spaceship. The launch was conducted in a condition required for a manned spacecraft. It carried out experiments in the fields of space life science, space material, space astronomy and space physics under conditions of microgravity.


Launch time: 10:15 p.m., March 25, 2002

Landing time: 4:51 a.m., April 1, 2002

The module carried human physical monitoring sensors and “dummy astronauts.” It was also equipped with the escape and emergency rescue functions.


Launch time: 12:40 a.m., Dec. 30, 2002

Landing time: 7:16 p.m., Jan. 5, 2003

The module was launched at a temperature of minus 29 degrees Celsius. Excessive harmful gas, found in the previous three crafts, was reduced to a safe level in the fourth. Radiation-proof facilities and automatic and manual emergency rescue systems were installed on the spacecraft.


Launch time: 9:00 a.m., Oct. 15, 2003

Landing time: 6:23 a.m., Oct. 16, 2003

The launch of the spacecraft was the first manned mission, which realized the nation’s thousand-year dream of manned space flight and was a new milestone for China’s space program.

The craft carried astronaut Yang Liwei, 38.


Launch time: 9:00 a.m., Oct. 12, 2005

Landing time: 4:33 a.m., Oct. 17, 2005

It was China’s second manned spaceflight, with astronauts Fei Junlong and Nie Haisheng aboard.

The mission aimed to master the technology relating to a “multi-person and multi-day” orbital flight, as well as to carry out manned space-related scientific experiments and medical experiments.


Launch time: 9:10 p.m., Sept. 25, 2008

Landing time: 5:37 p.m., Sept. 28, 2008

China carried out a historic first spacewalk by a Chinese astronaut. Zhai Zhigang, Liu Boming and Jing Haipeng were onboard.

Zhai went out of the cabin at 4:34 p.m. of Sept. 27, 43 hours after the launch of the craft, and remained outside the craft for 19 minutes and 35 seconds. China became the third country in the world able to conduct extravehicular activity in space, following the Soviet Union and the United States.

Article link:

“In Praise of Learning” by Bertolt Brecht []

Posted in Uncategorized on September 30, 2011 by Zuo Shou / 左手

When this was written in 1931 the Weimar republic had died and Hitler was on the road to power.

Brecht, of course, was the great [playwright] and poet of the early part of the 1900′s. His poem, “In Praise of Learning” is more important now than ever! Here it is in its entirety! – Danny Weil

Study from bottom up,
for you who will take the leadership,
it is not too late!
Study the ABC; it is not enough.
but study it!
Do not become discouraged, begin! You must know everything!
You must prepare to take command,now!
Study, man in exile!
Study. man in the prison!
Study, wife in your kitchen!
Study, old-age pensioner!
You must prepare to take command now!
Locate yourself a school, homeless folk!
Go search some knowledge, you who freeze!
You who starve, reach for a book: it will be a weapon.
You must prepare to take command now.
Don’t be afraid to question, comrades!
Never believe on faith.
see for yourself!
What you yourself don’t learn
you don’t know.
Question the reckoning
you yourself must pay it
Set down your finger on each small item. asking:
where do you get this?
You must prepare to take command now!

[Actually I believe these are lyrics from a song within Brecht’s play “The Mother” (Die Mutter). If anyone can point to other online versions of this poem, please notify me as I’m not quite satisfied with the layout of this one – Zuo Shou]

Article link: