China Economy: News & Discussion

Haldilal

लड़ते लड़ते जीना है, लड़ते लड़ते मरना है
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2020
Messages
3,648
Likes
11,315
Country flag
Ya'll Nibbiars Such a lack of commercial decision-making by China’s state-owned sector has been identified by the International Monetary Fund as one of the challenges facing Beijing as it looks to reform the economy and lower debt levels. The IMF noted state-backed firms were responsible for much of the run up in China’s debt over the last decade and urged an end to subsidies for the sector and said non-viable firms should be forced to default on their debt and exit the market.

The IMF is forecasting China’s debt levels to hit nearly 400 per cent of GDP by 2022 and said growth could move sharply lower if rising leverage was not addressed. “This rising debt levels raises concerns for a possible sharp decline in growth in the medium term.
 

johnq

Regular Member
Joined
May 30, 2009
Messages
901
Likes
1,959
Continued from my last post . . .
The following article give evidence by multiple researchers that Covid-19 virus was created via genetic manipulation in a Chinese Communist Party PLA military lab and intentionally spread to other countries by Chinese government. I am posting sections from the article in parts as it is very long (Parts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 are above; Part 6 is below the introduction below):

SARS-CoV-2: lab-origin hypothesis gains traction

More than eight months after SARS-CoV-2 emerged as a global threat, there is still no clarity about its origins. Those who suspect that the virus was developed in a laboratory are frequently dismissed as conspiracy theorists, but there is growing evidence to support the suggestion that gain-of-function research has made SARS-CoV-2 particularly virulent.

While some scientists still argue that SARS-CoV-2 is a product of natural evolution, others consider an accidental or deliberate leak from a laboratory to be a valid hypothesis that merits further investigation.

For decades, gain-of-function research, which alters viruses to increase their transmissibility, pathogenicity, virulence or lethality, has been carried out by American and Chinese scientists working in collaboration. There have been numerous ‘leaks’ of viruses from laboratories, including during the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) outbreak that occurred in 2003–2004.

Those who suggest that SARS-CoV-2 may well have originated in a laboratory include the Norwegian virologist Birger Sørensen, the French scientist and Nobel prize winner Luc Montagnier, and the exiled Chinese scientist Li-Meng Yan, who says that SARS-CoV-2 is an “unrestricted bioweapon” and there has been “large-scale, organised scientific fraud” in covering up the truth.

Yan and others say there is evidence within the spike protein of the SARS-CoV-2 genome that suggests it is a product of genetic manipulation. . . .


(Part 6):
In a paper published on the pre-print repository ViXr.org in May, independent researcher Murat Seyran from Vienna says that the host tropism (the infection specificity of certain pathogens to particular hosts and host tissues) and the infection pattern of SARS-CoV-2 have three fundamental differences compared to the previous six human pathogenic coronaviruses.


“The unnatural flat pattern of SARS-CoV-2 S protein NTD [N-terminal domain] is conflicting with the evolutionary host tropism strategy of not only the human CoVs but also many different human pathogenic viruses,” Seyran said.


Why have we not seen any pandemic caused by coronaviruses before? Seyran asks. Why did pandemics not emerge in places where people rely on water sources shared with bats or bats are consumed as bushmeat?


Seyran also says that, in the case of SARS-CoV-2, the S Protein RBD is not a high-frequency positive selection site, unlike in other coronaviruses.


The SARS-CoV-2 genome is almost identical to the bat coronavirus, but it is only mutated on the RBD, Seyran says. “Why only the RBD had mutations meanwhile the rest of the genome was almost unaltered?”


It is argued that the presence of a furin cleavage spike in SARS-CoV-2’s spike protein is evidence that the virus did not develop naturally.


A furin cleavage site is a segment of four amino acids that enables a virus to use furin in the human body as an enzyme to dissolve its coating so that it can release its genetic material to infect cells. Furin cleavage sites tend to be more infectious than cleavage sites that use other enzymes.


Seyran is one of 18 scientists who wrote a letter to the editor of the Journal of Medical Virology, which was published on September 3.


The scientists, who are from the US, Austria, Iran, Sudan, India, the UK, New Zealand, Egypt, Switzerland, and Jordan, wrote about the unnatural shape of SARS-CoV-2’s spike protein.


“The SARS-CoV-2 host tropism/adaptation pattern has significant discrepancies compared to other CoVs, raising questions concerning the proximal origin of SARSCoV-2,” Seyran et al. wrote.
“The flat and non-sunken surface of the sialic acid-binding domain of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (S protein) conflicts with the general adaptation and survival pattern observed for all other CoVs.”


Seyran et al. say that SARS-CoV-2 recombination presumably occurred between the S1/S2 domains of the S protein, enabling host furin protease utilisation.


“Although millions of recorded cases have been recorded globally, SARS-CoV-2 S protein does not have any apparent further recombination, placing it in conflict with the recombination models of other CoVs,” the scientists wrote.
“Similarly, the S protein receptor-binding domain (RBD) of SARS-CoV-2 has not accumulated high-frequency non-synonymous substitutions, differentiating SARS-CoV-2 from other CoVs that have positive selection/adaptation mutations in their RBDs.”


Clinical SARS-CoV-2 isolates to date have only a single high frequency non-synonymous mutation, D614G, in their S protein, Seyran et al. say.


“Based on currently known mutation rates and patterns in clinical isolates of SARS-CoV-2, the S protein does not appear to be a mutational ‘hot spot’ for SARSCoV-2, unlike other human CoVs.”
Seyran et al. say that the furin recognition motif present at the SARS-CoV2 S1/S2 junction has no analogy in other “linage B” beta-coronaviruses, including neither pangolin-CoV nor RaTG13.


They say evidence suggests that the addition of a motif for S1/S2 site furin cleavage constituted a unique recombination occurrence.


“The CoV-unique insertion of 4 amino-acids creating a novel RRAR furin cleavage site introduces two arginine codons CGG-CGG, whose usage is extremely rare in CoVs, further supporting the hypothesis of a unique recombination occurrence.”
Quote from previous section:
“On January 21, President Xi Jinping asked the director-general of the WHO, Dr Tedros Adhanom, to withhold information about person-to-person transmission of the virus, as well as pandemic classification. Likely as a consequence, pandemic classification of the virus was delayed four to six weeks.”


The scientific evidence shown in this and previous posted articles is further proof that Covid-19 virus is a result of lab modification by Wuhan Institute of Virology of viruses owned by the Chinese Communist Party funded People's Liberation Army (PLA) laboratories. The fact that Xi Jinping hid person-to-person transmission of the virus from the world for six weeks while allowing international travel from Wuhan is proof that Xi Jinping and Chinese Communist Party intentionally spread the Covid-19 virus to other countries. The Covid-19 virus was created as a bioweapon through modification/combination of viruses in Chinese Communist Party funded PLA laboratories, and then intentionally leaked from Wuhan Virology Institute in Wuhan as a bio-weapon. The knowledge about the virus was then suppressed as it was allowed to spread to the rest of the world intentionally using the Chinese people as carriers. This should not be surprising as the Chinese leadership does not care about common Chinese people. The Chinese leadership also stocked up on PPE (masks, etc) and antiviral medications ahead of time, so they were well-prepared. And since they were the ones who spread the virus, they knew where to lock down (Wuhan) as well as where to trace the cases within China. Yet they intentionally allowed the virus to spread throughout the world.
 

johnq

Regular Member
Joined
May 30, 2009
Messages
901
Likes
1,959

SHI ZHENG LI
or Shi Zhengli or Dr. Zheng-li Shi (AKA "The Bat Lady") Director of the Centre for Emergence of Infectious Disease and Biosafety at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, a Biosafety Level Four Biocontainment Lab, where diseases with no known cures are studied, is the number one suspect in the creation of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. According to her the pandemic is "nature's punishment for an unsanitary lifestyle." She had the skills, 24 hour access to the equipment needed to create the virus, and could have easily done it on her own.

The WIV was established in order to study the SARS viruses after the first SARS outbreak in 2003. However, it became a SARS virus factory. SARS viruses were the subject of Gain-of-Function (GoF) experiments in order to make them "gain an additional function" and become more lethal and contagious thus creating NOVEL or new viruses. This was a highly controversial procedure that set off alarms among scientists. SO - there just happened to be a SARS virus factory in the same city where an outbreak of SARS-CoV-2, a Novel virus, took place. How could this be a coincidence? Nature Magazine thinks so: "That the WIV, a laboratory highly regarded for its work on bat coronaviruses, is located in the city where the outbreak first emerged is probably just a coincidence."

WIV stressed that their aim of research on coronaviruses was to find vaccines and antivirus drugs to deal with possible future outbreak due to a new attack of coronaviruses on humans. The HKC News reported:

"In the last 14 years, WIV has published a rich pool of papers on the study of coronavirus and made a collection of viruses from bats in their habitat. However, we have so far not witnessed the department under SHI ZHENG LI, publish any research paper on vaccines and antiviral drugs countering the coronaviruses they have collected from nature and laboratory synthesized. SHI ZHENG LI and her teammate's warned of the potential outbreak of disease caused by a new coronavirus with high infectivity and pathogenicity were not acted upon and vaccines and drugs they promised were not being delivered."
SHI ZHENG LI created the virus and WANG YANYI and WEIFENG SHI covered it up. These scientists were inducing GoF mutations, doing genetic insertions and assembling new parts for the SARS CoV-1 virus and thus creating new forms of life at the time the first case of SARS-CoV-2 appeared. It was SHI ZHENG LI's team that produced SARS-CoV-2.
THE FORENSIC EVIDENCE OF LAB CREATION
GAIN OF FUNCTION INSERTIONS AT POLYBASIC FURIN CLEAVAGE SITE IS EVIDENCE VIRUS WAS MODIFIED FOR INCREASED INFECTIVITY AND PATHOGENICITY

Polybasic PRRA Furin Cleavage Site
No clear evolutionary pathway has been identified that would explain the presence of SARS-CoV-2’s furin polybasic cleavage site, especially given its enhanced pathogenic significance. It is, therefore, not an unreasonable alternative to assume that the unique furin polybasic cleavage site found in SARS-CoV-2 and in no other close relatives may be the result of genetic manipulation.
SARS-CoV-2 has a Furin Polybasic Cleavage Site PRRA that is not found in either bat, and pangolin viruses that were genetically similar to SARS-CoV-2. This insertion interface makes it easy for the virus to infect humans because the spike protein on the virus immediately interacts with furin at the polybasic cleavage site. Furin is an enzyme found abundantly in the body. Furin assists the virus envelope in merging with the cell membrane to infect it. Similar furin-like sites were also found in other viruses such as HIV and Ebola causing scientists to explore their similarities to SARS-CoV-2. This insertion allows the virus to skip animal to human transmission infect humans. SARS-CoV-2 has not been found in nature as SARS CoV-1 was. One can say it hasn't yet been found in nature but since the Corona Plague scientists have been looking desperately for this missing link. The coronaviruses causing SARS CoV-1 were descended from coronaviruses affecting masked civets and camels. Their genetic similarity was found to be 99 percent. This level of similarity was not found between bat and pangolin viruses or any other living creature, and SARS-CoV-2, because this is a creation of SHI ZHENG LI. Some scientists claim that inserting a new gene in a virus is like substituting a red brick for a black brick in a structure, but new insertion techniques leave no trace of human intervention.

DR. RONEN SHEMESH EXPLAINS THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE POLYBASIC FURIN CLEAVAGE SITE PRRA

RONEN SHEMESH
According to Israeli geneticist,Dr. Ronen Shemesh, the Furin site is the most unusual finding. “I believe that the most important issue about the differences between ALL coronavirus types is the insertion of a Furin protease cleavage site at the Spike protein of SARS-CoV-2,” he said. “Such an insertion is very rare in evolution, the addition of such 4 Amino acids alone in the course of only 20 years is very unlikely.” Shamesh believes the novel coronavirus was most likely created in a lab, and did not evolve in nature. “There are many reasons to believe that the COVID- generating SARS-CoV-2 was generated in a lab. Most probably by methods of genetic engineering,” he said, adding “I believe that this is the only way an insertion like the FURIN protease cleavage site could have been introduced directly at the right place and become effective.“ Dr Shemesh, who has a PhD in Genetics and Molecular Biology from the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, and over 21 years of experience in the field of drug discovery and development, said it is even “more unlikely” that this insertion happened in exactly the right place of the cleavage site of the spike protein – which is where it would need to occur to make the virus more infectious. “What makes it even more suspicious is that fact that this insertion not only occurred on the right place and in the right time, but also turned the cleavage site from an Serine protease cleavage site* to a FURIN cleavage site,” he added. This protein cleaving protein is highly promiscuous, it’s found in many human tissues and cell types and is involved in many OTHER virus types activation and infection mechanisms (it is involved in HIV, Herpes, Ebola and Dengue virus mechanisms). If I was trying to engineer a virus strain with a higher affinity and infective potential to humans, I would do exactly that: I would add a Furin Cleavage PRRA site directly at the original less effective and more cell specific cleavage site. I believe that this is the only way an insertion like the FURIN protease cleavage site PRRA could have been introduced directly at the right place and become effective. I believe that the most important issue about the differences between ALL coronavirus types is the insertion of a Furin protease cleavage site at the Spike protein of SARS-CoV-2.”
*Serine proteases are a family of cell membrane tethered serine proteases with unclear roles as their cleavage site specificities and substrate degradomes have not been fully elucidated.

“On January 21, President Xi Jinping asked the director-general of the WHO, Dr Tedros Adhanom, to withhold information about person-to-person transmission of the virus, as well as pandemic classification. Likely as a consequence, pandemic classification of the virus was delayed four to six weeks.”


The scientific evidence shown in this and previous posted articles is further proof that Covid-19 virus is a result of lab modification by Wuhan Institute of Virology of viruses owned by the Chinese Communist Party funded People's Liberation Army (PLA) laboratories. The fact that Xi Jinping hid person-to-person transmission of the virus from the world for six weeks while allowing international travel from Wuhan is proof that Xi Jinping and Chinese Communist Party intentionally spread the Covid-19 virus to other countries. The Covid-19 virus was created as a bioweapon through modification/combination of viruses in Chinese Communist Party funded PLA laboratories, and then intentionally leaked from Wuhan Virology Institute in Wuhan as a bio-weapon. The knowledge about the virus was then suppressed as it was allowed to spread to the rest of the world intentionally using the Chinese people as carriers. This should not be surprising as the Chinese leadership does not care about common Chinese people. The Chinese leadership also stocked up on PPE (masks, etc) and antiviral medications ahead of time, so they were well-prepared. And since they were the ones who spread the virus, they knew where to lock down (Wuhan) as well as where to trace the cases within China. Yet they intentionally allowed the virus to spread throughout the world. At the behest of the CCP, the WHO gave the advise not to wear a mask to other countries, even as the Chinese people were required to wear masks to stop the outbreak; masks which the Chinese government had stocked up on while lying to the world that there is no person to person transmission.
 
Last edited:

Maharaj samudragupt

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2020
Messages
442
Likes
1,011
Country flag
‘Boiling us like frogs’: China’s clampdown on Muslims creeps into the heartland, finds new targets

Worrying signs first emerged two years ago in this Muslim pocket in China’s heartland. Calls to prayer, once broadcast from local mosques, fell silent. The Koran, banned from sale, vanished from bookstores.

Members of the Hui minority, who number 10 million, hoped that the state crackdown would not arrive here, in the fertile valleys and loess hills of Gansu province, as it had in Xinjiang, the homeland of the other major Muslim ethnic group in China, the Uighurs.
Hope faded in April. Government cranes began appearing ominously over Hui mosques. A video surfaced on social media showing workers taking apart the Gazhuang mosque’s gold dome, then smashing it into the prayer hall. Local Hui saw an unmistakable metaphor: The Communist Party, which once handled religious life here with a light touch, now ran roughshod over it.

“Women were crying; others, like me, couldn’t believe what was happening,” said Ma Ha, a 40-year-old owner of a noodle shop. “We had 40 years of religious freedom. The winds are changing.”
Under its leader, Xi Jinping, China’s government has intensified efforts to assimilate ethnic minorities and curtail religions, such as Islam, that it considers carriers of foreign influence. For two years on the Xinjiang frontier, China has sent hundreds of thousands, possibly millions, of Uighurs to what it calls reeducation centers, where they are taught to renounce their religion and culture and embrace new state-prescribed identities as secular Chinese.
That tide of “Sinicization,” as Chinese policymakers call it, is surging nationwide. A recent, unescorted trip through Gansu, a corridor that once ushered Silk Road caravans and Islam into imperial China, revealed an accelerating campaign to assimilate another Muslim minority, the Hui, a Chinese-speaking people with no recent record of separatism or extremism.

The campaign targeting the Hui does not feature mass internment or pervasive digital surveillance, the most striking aspects of the Xinjiang crackdown. But it is a purge of ideas, symbols, culture, products — anything deemed not Chinese. It permeates life, in ways existential and mundane.
Chinese database tracks apps, car location and even electricity usage in Muslim region
Domes and minarets are lopped off mosques and replaced with curving Chinese roofs. News broadcasts are forbidden to show pedestrians wearing traditional Hui skullcaps or veils. Arabic script is outlawed in public spaces, so practically every restaurant has a sun-beaten facade with dark traces where the word “halal” has been scraped off.
Strict new quotas throttle religious education to the degree that some Hui intellectuals predict their people could become largely irreligious, like most of China, in two or three generations.

Pressures are mounting against the Hui, the distant descendants of Persian traders, at a moment when the Communist leadership is stoking nationalism among the ethnic majority Han to bolster popular support. In officials’ speeches, on television and across billboards, one frequent refrain is the “China Dream” — Xi’s vision of restoring China’s historic power and wealth, its culture and its pride.
“The great rejuvenation of the Chinese people is actually a narrow-minded, xenophobic kind of nationalism,” said Li Yunfei, an imam from eastern China and one of the last dissident Hui writers. “Anything that is defined by them as coming from abroad, they strive to eliminate through administrative means.”
An April 2018 Communist Party directive obtained by the Germany-based World Uighur Congress advocacy group showed the party’s central leadership instructing local authorities to reverse what it deemed to be growing “Saudi” and “Arab” influences in architecture, clothing, religious practice and language.

Although the contents of the directive were confidential, government offices nationwide have issued general statements confirming they were implementing its orders.
The 22 million followers of Islam are not the only people touched by China’s assimilation drive. Christian church steeples and crosses have been taken down across the country. When party bosses inspected Tibetan regions in August, they told local officials to implement Xi’s “important words on religious work,” tighten control over monasteries and “focus efforts to Sinicize religion.”
Ambitious social re-engineering will be seen as one of Xi’s legacies, said Vanessa Frangville, a professor of Chinese studies at the Université libre de Bruxelles in Belgium.

By curbing religion, the party “removes potential opponents to power,” Frangville said. “To control the whole population through technology and ideology — it’s what leaders dream about.”
'We've regressed 40 years'
For centuries, Gansu was a land of transition. In the hills where the Tibetan highlands flatten into prairie, sprawling Tibetan monasteries exerted a greater gravity than the emperors of faraway Beijing. In the Daxia River valley, Sufi preachers and devout warlords had turned an old Silk Road hub called Linxia into a Hui bastion decades before communists swept through in 1949.
Today, Beijing wants to make its influence felt.
A Hui Muslim man rides past a mosque in Linxia in 2018. The Chinese Communist Party has targeted symbols of Islam in the province as part of its “Sinicization” efforts.

A Hui Muslim man rides past a mosque in Linxia in 2018. The Chinese Communist Party has targeted symbols of Islam in the province as part of its “Sinicization” efforts. (Johannes Eisele/AFP/Getty Images)
On a recent morning, a local imam ushered a visitor past a flagpole with a flapping red Chinese banner that officials insisted on installing earlier this year. Along a courtyard wall, propaganda bulletins reminded worshipers of their foremost loyalty: the communist state before Allah.

“Islam has been in China 1,300 years. Other than 10 years of the Cultural Revolution, it’s always been passed down generation to generation without a break,” said the imam, who, like almost everyone in Gansu, spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of government retribution. “We’ve regressed 40 years to the Cultural Revolution.”
Sitting in his classroom, where the number of religious students had plunged 90 percent in one year as new quotas took effect, the imam spoke about how the Koran was banned from sale and local publishers who printed the hadith — collections of the prophet Muhammad’s sayings — were jailed.
Angry over campus speech by Uighur activist, Chinese students in Canada contact their consulate, film presentation
Most destabilizing, the imam said, was the sense of foreboding.

Hui officials felt unsure about how to please the central government, so they erred on the side of caution, the imam said. Everybody else — from wealthy Hui businessmen to poor farmers — felt “completely paralyzed,” he said.

“The Xinjiang policy is already being implemented here. At least we’re moving in that direction,” the imam said. “We’re born and raised Chinese. Our passports are Chinese. Our forefathers are Chinese. How do you want us to be more Chinese?”
Down an alley from Linxia’s Binhe mosque, one of at least three in the city facing what officials euphemistically call “renovation,” a day laborer named Ma Junyi seemed strained as he spoke about the shifting sands.

Residents were uneasy about new restrictions that cut the madrassa’s class sizes down to 30 — a quota enforced by random checks, Ma said. Youngsters under 18, such as his 9-year-old daughter, were forbidden to set foot inside the mosque courtyard.
“We know leaders have their reasons,” Ma said. “But how can we pass on our traditions? It feels like we’re going extinct.”
An American model
In 2008 and 2009, China was rocked by race riots in Tibet and Xinjiang that left hundreds of Han, Uighurs and Tibetans dead.

In the following years, a remarkably open discussion about China’s ethnic policy flourished on campuses, in journals, even on television. Two of the most influential voices were Hu Angang, a conservative intellectual at Tsinghua University in Beijing, and Hu Lianhe, a midcareer official who later soared through the Communist Party ranks.
In 2011, the two Hus, who are not related, teamed up to publish essays critiquing long-standing policies that recognized China’s 55 ethnic minorities, offered them preferential treatment on matters such as college admissions, and carved out regions where peoples such as Uighurs and Tibetans lived with some autonomy.
The Hus pointed out that religious and ethno-nationalist impulses played a role in the demise of the Soviet Union — a cautionary tale that the Chinese Communist Party studies obsessively. They called for an “upgrade” of the policies and pointed to a model that they thought China should consider: the United States.

“The early melting pot policy . . . was a powerful ‘Anglo-Saxonization’ policy, mainly assimilating other ethnic groups into Anglo-Protestant groups,” they wrote in a paper that traced waves of U.S. immigration from southern Europe and later Latin America. “Although the norms of pluralism have become very strong in recent years, the fact remains that ethnic differences are tending to disappear.”
China celebrates ‘very happy lives’ in Xinjiang, after detaining 1 million Uighurs
The articles sparked controversy in China. But today, they are the most-cited papers on the subject, said Hu Angang. They helped propel Hu Lianhe to become a top official; last year, he defended China’s Xinjiang policy before a United Nations panel in Geneva.
In an interview and in emails, Hu Angang said his ideas were often misunderstood in the West. He did not espouse forced assimilation, he said, but the wisdom of China’s ethnic policies was proved by data showing the standard of development in Xinjiang and Tibet outstripping neighboring countries stricken by poverty and chaos.
“Ethnic harmony and social stability are the greatest, most important public good, but invisible and intangible like fresh air.”
A quiet demise
Weeks after Linxia was stunned by the video of grieving worshipers wailing next to their crushed Gazhuang mosque, a retired village party secretary sat in a nearby farmhouse picking at a plate of stewed chicken.
Was China cracking down on Islam? Nonsense, he said.
First, he said, the Linxia government is paying to rebuild the Gazhuang mosque — with a Chinese-style roof. Workers did drop the dome, but it was an accident. And the video that went viral was uploaded by mischievous young Hui who have since been punished with 24-hour detention and released. The party was not only beneficent, he said, but also lenient.
“Why is a dome so important?” the official said as he shuffled to a coat rack and removed his Hui skullcap in favor of a sun hat. “I can swap out my hat. You can swap out a dome. The government’s not saying you can’t be Muslim, or forcing you to be Buddhist or Christian!”
Residents had voiced worries about the direction things were headed, he conceded, but quickly dismissed the thought. “I tell the people they need to trust me, we are not in danger,” he said. “And the people trust me.”
The bottom line was that China had the right to do things its way, he said.
“How can Americans possibly lecture China about religious freedom?” he said. “How many Muslims has America killed in Iraq and Afghanistan? If you ask the Muslim world if they prefer America or China, I believe they would say China.”
In a high-rise near Linxia’s modest downtown, Suleiman, a 30-something public-sector employee, said local government officials and Communist Party members, most of whom are Hui, were caught in a particular bind.
Party members and civil servants are prohibited from making hajj pilgrimages, the obligation of every Muslim, according to Suleiman. Linxia city employees cannot be seen praying, and Hui contractors are asked to take off skullcaps when they meet officials for city business.
Suleiman said the government policies seemed almost mild compared with rhetoric on Chinese social media, where popular Han nationalist accounts often sound warnings about sharia law, halal food and other alleged Islamic conspiracies corrupting Chinese society.
Chinese Christians are also under pressure from the state, Suleiman said, but there seemed to be no widespread antipathy toward Christians, no explosive potential.
In Central Asia’s forbidding highlands, a quiet newcomer: Chinese troops

A tarp partly blocks the view of a mosque outside of Linxia
A tarp blocks drivers from seeing the minarets of a mosque being taken down outside of Linxia. (TWP)
“I’m afraid someday there will be mass movement against Muslims,” he said. “I’m terrified, because China has been easily gripped by mass movements since ancient times.”
To journey through Linxia, where eight great mosques, a bazaar and warlord estates once composed the center of Hui life, is to see the Sinicization campaign unfolding with a meticulous logic.
Along the highway approaching the city, a wall of black tarp perfectly blocks drivers from seeing the Jiajianan mosque’s minarets being pruned in the distance. On the main commercial avenue, officials covered up Islamic arches with stone slabs featuring a Chinese motif, chrysanthemum flowers. In a government-run museum, curators removed skullcaps and headscarves from mannequins in an exhibit on Hui culture.
In the next room, an exhibit on local history celebrates how the region’s mosques were rebuilt during the 1980s. It omits a piece of context: Many were razed earlier, in 1957, by communist zealots during a mass frenzy whipped up by Chairman Mao Zedong.
The Hui in Gansu today do not suffer violence, only a quiet demise, Suleiman said: “They’re slowly boiling us like frogs.”
Xi jinping, tum aage badho (lac se peeche hat be )
Hum tumhare saath (is matter me sirf) hai
 

johnq

Regular Member
Joined
May 30, 2009
Messages
901
Likes
1,959
From: https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morning-jolt/chinas-devastating-lies/
The Comprehensive Timeline of China’s COVID-19 Lies

On today’s menu: a day-by-day, month-by-month breakdown of China’s coronavirus coverup and the irreparable damage it has caused around the globe.

The Timeline of a Viral Ticking Time Bomb


The story of the coronavirus pandemic is still being written. But at this early date, we can see all kinds of moments where different decisions could have lessened the severity of the outbreak we are currently enduring. You have probably heard variations of: “Chinese authorities denied that the virus could be transferred from human to human until it was too late.” What you have probably not heard is how emphatically, loudly, and repeatedly the Chinese government insisted human transmission was impossible, long after doctors in Wuhan had concluded human transmission was ongoing — and how the World Health Organization assented to that conclusion, despite the suspicions of other outside health experts.

Clearly, the U.S. government’s response to this threat was not nearly robust enough, and not enacted anywhere near quickly enough. Most European governments weren’t prepared either. Few governments around the world were or are prepared for the scale of the danger. We can only wonder whether accurate and timely information from China would have altered the way the U.S. government, the American people, and the world prepared for the oncoming danger of infection.

Some point in late 2019: The coronavirus jumps from some animal species to a human being. The best guess at this point is that it happened at a Chinese “wet market.”

December 6: According to a study in The Lancet, the symptom onset date of the first patient identified was “Dec 1, 2019 . . . 5 days after illness onset, his wife, a 53-year-old woman who had no known history of exposure to the market, also presented with pneumonia and was hospitalized in the isolation ward.” In other words, as early as the second week of December, Wuhan doctors were finding cases that indicated the virus was spreading from one human to another.

December 21: Wuhan doctors begin to notice a “cluster of pneumonia cases with an unknown cause.

December 25:
Chinese medical staff in two hospitals in Wuhan are suspected of contracting viral pneumonia and are quarantined. This is additional strong evidence of human-to-human transmission.

Sometime in “Late December”: Wuhan hospitals notice “an exponential increase” in the number of cases that cannot be linked back to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market, according to the New England Journal of Medicine.

December 30: Dr. Li Wenliang sent a message to a group of other doctors warning them about a possible outbreak of an illness that resembled severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), urging them to take protective measures against infection.

December 31:
The Wuhan Municipal Health Commission declares, “The investigation so far has not found any obvious human-to-human transmission and no medical staff infection.” This is the opposite of the belief of the doctors working on patients in Wuhan, and two doctors were already suspected of contracting the virus.

Three weeks after doctors first started noticing the cases, China contacts the World Health Organization.

Tao Lina, a public-health expert and former official with Shanghai’s center for disease control and prevention, tells the South China Morning Post, “I think we are [now] quite capable of killing it in the beginning phase, given China’s disease control system, emergency handling capacity and clinical medicine support.”

January 1: The Wuhan Public Security Bureau issued summons to Dr. Li Wenliang, accusing him of “spreading rumors.” Two days later, at a police station, Dr. Li signed a statement acknowledging his “misdemeanor” and promising not to commit further “unlawful acts.” Seven other people are arrested on similar charges and their fate is unknown.

Also that day, “after several batches of genome sequence results had been returned to hospitals and submitted to health authorities, an employee of one genomics company received a phone call from an official at the Hubei Provincial Health Commission, ordering the company to stop testing samples from Wuhan related to the new disease and destroy all existing samples.”

According to a New York Times study of cellphone data from China, 175,000 people leave Wuhan that day. According to global travel data research firm OAG, 21 countries have direct flights to Wuhan. In the first quarter of 2019 for comparison, 13,267 air passengers traveled from Wuhan, China, to destinations in the United States, or about 4,422 per month. The U.S. government would not bar foreign nationals who had traveled to China from entering the country for another month.

January 2: One study of patients in Wuhan can only connect 27 of 41 infected patients to exposure to the Huanan seafood market — indicating human-to-human transmission away from the market. A report written later that month concludes, “evidence so far indicates human transmission for 2019-nCoV. We are concerned that 2019-nCoV could have acquired the ability for efficient human transmission.”

Also on this day, the Wuhan Institute of Virology completed mapped the genome of the virus. The Chinese government would not announce that breakthrough for another week.

January 3: The Chinese government continued efforts to suppress all information about the virus: “China’s National Health Commission, the nation’s top health authority, ordered institutions not to publish any information related to the unknown disease, and ordered labs to transfer any samples they had to designated testing institutions, or to destroy them.”


Roughly one month after the first cases in Wuhan, the United States government is notified. Robert Redfield, the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, gets initial reports about a new coronavirus from Chinese colleagues, according to Health and Human Services secretary Alex Azar. Azar, who helped manage the response at HHS to earlier SARS and anthrax outbreaks, told his chief of staff to make sure the National Security Council was informed.

Also on this day, the Wuhan Municipal Health Commission released another statement, repeating, “As of now, preliminary investigations have shown no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission and no medical staff infections.

January 4: While Chinese authorities continued to insist that the virus could not spread from one person to another, doctors outside that country weren’t so convinced. The head of the University of Hong Kong’s Centre for Infection, Ho Pak-leung, warned that “the city should implement the strictest possible monitoring system for a mystery new viral pneumonia that has infected dozens of people on the mainland, as it is highly possible that the illness is spreading from human to human.”

January 5: The Wuhan Municipal Health Commission put out a statement with updated numbers of cases but repeated, “preliminary investigations have shown no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission and no medical staff infections.

January 6:
The New York Times publishes its first report about the virus, declaring that “59 people in the central city of Wuhan have been sickened by a pneumonia-like illness.” That first report included these comments:


Wang Linfa, an expert on emerging infectious diseases at the Duke-NUS Medical School in Singapore, said he was frustrated that scientists in China were not allowed to speak to him about the outbreak. Dr. Wang said, however, that he thought the virus was likely not spreading from humans to humans because health workers had not contracted the disease. “We should not go into panic mode,” he said.
Don’t get too mad at Wang Linfa; he was making that assessment based upon the inaccurate information Chinese government was telling the world.

Also that day, the CDC “issued a level 1 travel watch — the lowest of its three levels — for China’s outbreak. It said the cause and the transmission mode aren’t yet known, and it advised travelers to Wuhan to avoid living or dead animals, animal markets, and contact with sick people.”

Also that day, the CDC offered to send a team to China to assist with the investigation. The Chinese government declined, but a WHO team that included two Americans would visit February 16.

January 8: Chinese medical authorities claim to have identified the virus. Those authorities claim and Western media continue to repeat, “there is no evidence that the new virus is readily spread by humans, which would make it particularly dangerous, and it has not been tied to any deaths.”

The official statement from the World Health Organization declares, “Preliminary identification of a novel virus in a short period of time is a notable achievement and demonstrates China’s increased capacity to manage new outbreaks . . . WHO does not recommend any specific measures for travelers. WHO advises against the application of any travel or trade restrictions on China based on the information currently available.”

January 10: After unknowingly treating a patient with the Wuhan coronavirus, Dr. Li Wenliang started coughing and developed a fever. He was hospitalized on January 12. In the following days, Li’s condition deteriorated so badly that he was admitted to the intensive care unit and given oxygen support.

The New York Times quotes the Wuhan City Health Commission’s declaration that “there is no evidence the virus can spread among humans.” Chinese doctors continued to find transmission among family members, contradicting the official statements from the city health commission.

January 11: The Wuhan City Health Commission issues an update declaring, “All 739 close contacts, including 419 medical staff, have undergone medical observation and no related cases have been found . . . No new cases have been detected since January 3, 2020. At present, no medical staff infections have been found, and no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission has been found.” They issue a Q&A sheet later that day reemphasizing that “most of the unexplained viral pneumonia cases in Wuhan this time have a history of exposure to the South China seafood market. No clear evidence of human-to-human transmission has been found.”


Also on this day, political leaders in Hubei province, which includes Wuhan, began their regional meeting. The coronavirus was not mentioned over four days of meetings.

January 13: Authorities in Thailand detected the virus in a 61-year-old Chinese woman who was visiting from Wuhan, the first case outside of China. “Thailand’s Ministry of Public Health, said the woman had not visited the Wuhan seafood market, and had come down with a fever on Jan. 5. However, the doctor said, the woman had visited a different, smaller market in Wuhan, in which live and freshly slaughtered animals were also sold.”

January 14: Wuhan city health authorities release another statement declaring, “Among the close contacts, no related cases were found.” Wuhan doctors have known this was false since early December, from the first victim and his wife, who did not visit the market.

The World Health Organization echoes China’s assessment: “Preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) identified in Wuhan, China.

This is five or six weeks after the first evidence of human-to-human transmission in Wuhan.

January 15:
Japan reported its first case of coronavirus. Japan’s Health Ministry said the patient had not visited any seafood markets in China, adding that “it is possible that the patient had close contact with an unknown patient with lung inflammation while in China.”

The Wuhan Municipal Health Commission begins to change its statements, now declaring, “Existing survey results show that clear human-to-human evidence has not been found, and the possibility of limited human-to-human transmission cannot be ruled out, but the risk of continued human-to-human transmission is low.” Recall Wuhan hospitals concluded human-to-human transmission was occurring three weeks earlier. A statement the next day backtracks on the possibility of human transmission, saying only, “Among the close contacts, no related cases were found.

January 17:
The CDC and the Department of Homeland Security’s Customs and Border Protection announce that travelers from Wuhan to the United States will undergo entry screening for symptoms associated with 2019-nCoV at three U.S. airports that receive most of the travelers from Wuhan, China: San Francisco, New York (JFK), and Los Angeles airports.

The Wuhan Municipal Health Commission’s daily update declares, “A total of 763 close contacts have been tracked, 665 medical observations have been lifted, and 98 people are still receiving medical observations. Among the close contacts, no related cases were found.”

January 18: HHS Secretary Azar has his first discussion about the virus with President Trump. Unnamed “senior administration officials” told the Washington Post that “the president interjected to ask about vaping and when flavored vaping products would be back on the market.

Despite the fact that Wuhan doctors know the virus is contagious, city authorities allow 40,000 families to gather and share home-cooked food in a Lunar New Year banquet.

January 19: The Chinese National Health Commission declares the virus “still preventable and controllable.” The World Health Organization updates its statement, declaring, “Not enough is known to draw definitive conclusions about how it is transmitted, the clinical features of the disease, the extent to which it has spread, or its source, which remains unknown.”

January 20: The Wuhan Municipal Health Commission declares for the last time in its daily bulletin, “no related cases were found among the close contacts.


That day, the head of China’s national health commission team investigating the outbreak, confirmed that two cases of infection in China’s Guangdong province had been caused by human-to-human transmission and medical staff had been infected.

Also on this date, the Wuhan Evening News newspaper, the largest newspaper in the city, mentions the virus on the front page for the first time since January 5.

January 21: The CDC announced the first U.S. case of a the coronavirus in a Snohomish County, Wash., resident who returning from China six days earlier.

By this point, millions of people have left Wuhan, carrying the virus all around China and into other countries.

January 22
: WHO director-general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus continued to praise China’s handling of the outbreak. “I was very impressed by the detail and depth of China’s presentation. I also appreciate the cooperation of China’s Minister of Health, who I have spoken with directly during the last few days and weeks. His leadership and the intervention of President Xi and Premier Li have been invaluable, and all the measures they have taken to respond to the outbreak.”

In the preceding days, a WHO delegation conducted a field visit to Wuhan. They concluded, “deployment of the new test kit nationally suggests that human-to-human transmission is taking place in Wuhan.” The delegation reports, “their counterparts agreed close attention should be paid to hand and respiratory hygiene, food safety and avoiding mass gatherings where possible.”

At a meeting of the WHO Emergency Committee, panel members express “divergent views on whether this event constitutes a “Public Health Emergency of International Concern’ or not. At that time, the advice was that the event did not constitute a PHEIC.”


President Trump, in an interview with CNBC at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, declared, “We have it totally under control. It’s one person coming in from China. We have it under control. It’s going to be just fine.

January 23: Chinese authorities announce their first steps for a quarantine of Wuhan. By this point, millions have already visited the city and left it during the Lunar New Year celebrations. Singapore and Vietnam report their first cases, and by now an unknown but significant number of Chinese citizens have traveled abroad as asymptomatic, oblivious carriers.

January 24: Vietnam reports person-to-person transmission, and Japan, South Korea, and the U.S report their second cases. The second case is in Chicago. Within two days, new cases are reported in Los Angeles, Orange County, and Arizona. The virus is in now in several locations in the United States, and the odds of preventing an outbreak are dwindling to zero.

On February 1, Dr. Li Wenliang tested positive for coronavirus. He died from it six days later.


From: https://changingtimes.media/2020/10/12/sars-cov-2-lab-origin-hypothesis-gains-traction/
SARS-CoV-2: lab-origin hypothesis gains traction

“On January 21, President Xi Jinping asked the director-general of the WHO, Dr Tedros Adhanom, to withhold information about person-to-person transmission of the virus, as well as pandemic classification. Likely as a consequence, pandemic classification of the virus was delayed four to six weeks.”



The Chinese propagandists on this forum and elsewhere just don't get it. They are the ones that enable the criminal Chinese Communist Party government leadership that covered up the Covid-19 outbreak by accusing Dr. Li Wenliang and others of criminal activities, while lying that human-to-human transmission was not taking place. The Chinese Communist Party government leadership covered it up for at least six weeks and probably much longer, while allowing international travel, allowing the Covid-19 virus to spread everywhere. Xi Jinping and Chinese Communist Party government leadership is personally responsible for not only the deaths of Chinese people from Covid-19, but also millions of deaths worldwide due to spreading of Covid-19. Xi Jinping and Chinese Communist Party government leadership caused Chinese people's deaths by covering up that Covid-19 human-to-human transmission was taking place in order to spread the Covid-19 virus worldwide, thus using it as a bio-weapon.
 

johnq

Regular Member
Joined
May 30, 2009
Messages
901
Likes
1,959
THE AUSTRALIAN STUDY: SPIKE PROTEIN OPTIMIZED TO BIND TO HUMAN ACE2

NIKOLAI PETROVSKY "IN SILICO COMPARISON OF SPIKE PROTEIN-ACE2 BINDING AFFINITIES ACROSS SPECIES; SIGNIFICANCE FOR THE POSSIBLE ORIGIN OF THE SARS-CoV-2 VIRUS"
  • Sakshi Piplani 1,2,
  • Puneet Kumar Singh 2
  • David A. Winkler 3-6
  • Nikolai Petrovsky 1,2*
  • 1. College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Bedford Park 5046, Australia
  • 2. Vaxine Pty Ltd, 11 Walkley Avenue, Warradale 5046, Australia
  • 3. La Trobe University, Kingsbury Drive, Bundoora 3042, Australia
  • 4. Monash Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Monash University, Parkville 3052, Australia
  • 5. School of Pharmacy, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2RD. UK
  • 6. CSIRO Data61, Pullenvale 4069, Australia

    "ANOTHER POSSIBILITY WHICH STILL CANNOT BE EXCLUDED IS THAT SARS-CoV-2 WAS CREATED BY A RECOMBINATION EVENT THAT OCCURRED INADVERTENTLY OR CONSCIOUSLY IN A LABORATORY HANDLING CORONAVIRUSES, WITH THE NEW VIRUS THEN ACCIDENTALLY RELEASED INTO THE LOCAL HUMAN POPULATION."

    "Notably, this approach surprisingly revealed that the binding energy between SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and ACE2 was highest for humans out of all species tested, suggesting that SARS-CoV-2 spike protein is uniquely evolved to bind and infect cells expressing human ACE2. This finding is particularly surprising as, typically, a virus would be expected to have highest affinity for the receptor in its original host species, e.g. bat, with a lower initial binding affinity for the receptor of any new host, e.g. humans. However, in this case, the affinity of SARS-CoV-2 is higher for humans than for the putative original host species, bats, or for any potential intermediary host species. Although bats carry many coronaviruses including SARS-CoV, a relative of SARS-CoV-2, direct evidence for existence of SARS-CoV-2 in bats has not been found. As highlighted by our data, the binding strength of SARS-CoV-2 for bat ACE2 is considerably lower than for human ACE2, suggesting that even if SARS-CoV-2 did originally arise from a bat precursor it must later have adapted its spike protein to optimise its binding to human ACE2. There is no current explanation for how, when or where this might have happened. Instances of direct human infection by coronaviruses or other bat viruses is rare with transmission typically involving an intermediate host. For example, lyssaviruses such as Hendra are periodically transmitted from bats to horses and then to humans who contact the infected horse. Similarly, SARS-CoV was shown to be transmitted from bats to civet cats and from them to humans. To date, a virus identical to SARS-CoV-2 has not been identified in bats or any other non-human species, making its origins unclear. To date, the most closely related coronavirus to SARS-CoV-2, is the bat coronavirus, BatCoV RaTG1, which has 96% whole-genome identity to SARS-CoV-2. 50. The fact that SARS-CoV-2 has also not been found in any likely intermediate host raises questions of the origins of the original SARS-CoV-2."
  • Nikolai Petrovsky is a Professor in the College of Medicine and Public Health at Flinders University. He is also Research Director, Vaxine Pty Ltd. This is his statement: "An extremely important but still unanswered question is what was the original source of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. While SARS-CoV-2 has some similarities to SARS-CoV and other bat viruses, no natural virus matching to SARS-CoV-2 has yet been found in animals. Our group at Flinders University in collaboration with researchers at La Trobe University have used a modelling approach to study the possible evolutionary origins of SARS-CoV-2 by modelling interactions between its spike protein and a broad variety of ACE2 receptors from animals and humans. This work which has been made available on a prepress server, Arxiv and is downloadable at Arxiv shows that the strength of binding of SARS-CoV-2 to human ACE2 exceeds the predicted strength of binding to ACE2 of the other tested species, with pangolin ACE2 having the next highest affinity. This high binding to human ACE2 suggests the possibility that the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein has previously undergone selection on human ACE2 or a closely related ACE2 variant. How this might have happened is currently unknown and warrants further scientific investigation.
    Please note that the following quote was updated and censored in June 2020. This the original Petrovsky quote:
    "Take a bat coronavirus that is not infectious to humans, and force its selection by culturing it with cells that express human ACE2 receptor, such cells having been created many years ago to culture SARS coronaviruses and you can force the bat virus to adapt to infect human cells via mutations in its spike protein, which would have the effect of increasing the strength of its binding to human ACE2, and inevitably reducing the strength of its binding to bat ACE2. Viruses in prolonged culture will also develop other random mutations that do not affect its function. The result of these experiments is a virus that is highly virulent in humans but is sufficiently different that it no longer resembles the original bat virus. Because the mutations are acquired randomly by selection there is no signature of a human gene jockey, but this is clearly a virus still created by human intervention.”
    PASSAGING

    The experiment mentioned by Petrovsky represents a class of experiments called passaging. Passaging is the placing of a live virus into an animal or cell culture to which it is not adapted and then, before the virus dies out, transferring it to another animal or cell of the same type. Passaging is often done iteratively. The theory is that the virus will rapidly evolve (since viruses have high mutation rates) and become adapted to the new animal or cell type. Passaging a virus, by allowing it to become adapted to its new situation, creates a new pathogen. SCIMEX
From: https://changingtimes.media/2020/10/12/sars-cov-2-lab-origin-hypothesis-gains-traction/
SARS-CoV-2: lab-origin hypothesis gains traction

“On January 21, President Xi Jinping asked the director-general of the WHO, Dr Tedros Adhanom, to withhold information about person-to-person transmission of the virus, as well as pandemic classification. Likely as a consequence, pandemic classification of the virus was delayed four to six weeks.”

The scientific evidence shown in this and previous posted articles is further proof that Covid-19 virus is a result of lab modification by Wuhan Institute of Virology of viruses owned by the Chinese Communist Party funded People's Liberation Army (PLA) laboratories. The fact that Xi Jinping hid person-to-person transmission of the virus from the world for six weeks while allowing international travel from Wuhan is proof that Xi Jinping and Chinese Communist Party intentionally spread the Covid-19 virus to other countries. The Covid-19 virus was created as a bioweapon through modification/combination of viruses in Chinese Communist Party funded PLA laboratories, and then intentionally leaked from Wuhan Virology Institute in Wuhan as a bio-weapon. The knowledge about the virus was then suppressed as it was allowed to spread to the rest of the world intentionally using the Chinese people as carriers. This should not be surprising as the Chinese leadership does not care about common Chinese people. The Chinese leadership also stocked up on PPE (masks, etc) and antiviral medications ahead of time, so they were well-prepared. And since they were the ones who spread the virus, they knew where to lock down (Wuhan) as well as where to trace the cases within China. Yet they intentionally allowed the virus to spread throughout the world. At the behest of the CCP, the WHO gave the advise not to wear a mask to other countries, even as the Chinese people were required to wear masks to stop the outbreak; masks which the Chinese government had stocked up on while lying to the world that there is no person to person transmission.
 
Last edited:

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top