Miscellaneous News

iewgnem

Senior Member
Registered Member
Looks like Bloomberg is recycling these $1 trillion in investment numbers too.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Time will tell... Let me buy a BYD or Xiaomi EV in the US, and I'll be the first customer.
Considering Chjina wants US to remove national security restrictions on those investments, its probably well beyond cars.
It's funny how MAGA went from "we can't let China buy our farmland" to "we won big by selling our farmland"
 

pmc

Colonel
Registered Member
Sounds like a lot of bs. If I understood correctly, he was talking about intercepting either F-22s of F-35s. These aircrafts don‘t fly in their stealth configuration anywhere near Chinese radar. Of course it would be easier to get a lock on them under these conditions. So the entire story is a nothingburgher.

This happened in Syria also. I would not have taken it seriously until Saudi mainstream media did this comparison again which indicate not much performance difference. when they add this unknown report it is there own information that they want to convey. and the picture in twitter conveying that Su-57 fly ahead of Su-35.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

09.12.2017​

Su-35 intercepts US F-22, forcing it to leave Syrian airspace​


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
May 14, 2024 06:08

Comparison between the American F-22 and the Russian Su-35 fighter​

According to Russian reports, the Su-35 has super cruise capability, similar to the F-22 in maintaining Mach speeds without the need for afterburner
The two aircraft appear to be close, if not quite comparable, in terms of speed and thrust-to-weight ratio, so other variables likely determine the margin of difference between the two aircraft.

 

FriedButter

Brigadier
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

(UK) Home secretary ‘very disappointed’ over collapse of China spy trial​

The home secretary has refused to describe China as an “enemy of the UK” as she insisted there was no ministerial interference in the collapse of a Chinese espionage case.

Shabana Mahmood said she was “very disappointed” that the trial of Christopher Berry, 33, and Chris Cash, 30, a former parliamentary researcher, did not go ahead, as she was grilled over whether there was any influence from government advisers over the decision. Both men had denied the allegations.

The Sunday Times reported that Sir Keir Starmer’s national security adviser Jonathan Powell met with other senior Whitehall mandarins, including the foreign office's top civil servant Sir Oliver Robbins, to discuss the case early last month, days before the charges against the pair were dropped on 15 September.

In order to prove the case under the Official Secrets Act, prosecutors would have had to show the defendants were acting for an “enemy” – but Mr Powell reportedly revealed the government’s evidence would be based on the national security strategy, which does not use that term to describe China.

The Sunday Times reported this meant Matthew Collins, the deputy national security adviser due to give evidence for the prosecution, would be unable to say Beijing was an enemy.

Ms Mahmood said that she was not aware of any Whitehall meeting taking place to discuss the case, and insisted that there was no ministerial involvement, although the Sunday Times report focused on the actions of officials, rather than ministers.

Ms Mahmood told the BBC's Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg: “I don't recognise that reporting about a meeting, I'm not aware of any such meeting taking place.

“It was a decision of the Crown Prosecution Service, as they have made clear themselves, an independent decision on whether to proceed with that prosecution.

“I'm very disappointed that that prosecution has not proceeded. Our understanding is that the evidence that was available to the Crown Prosecution Service when they brought the charges is not materially different to the evidence that they had just before the trial was due to get under way.

“So, I think it's a question for the prosecution service to answer, but as the government, the home office, we very much wanted to see that trial proceed."

Asked if China was an enemy of the UK, she said: "China is a 'challenge', is, I think, the word that I would use."

She said Sir Keir’s government had a "hard-headed, realistic approach" to the Chinese state.

Stephen Parkinson, chief prosecutor in England and Wales, had said the CPS had determined the proceedings in the China spy case had to be stopped because of an "evidential failure".

Shadow national security minister Alicia Kearns, who had previously employed Mr Cash, said: "There are serious questions about constitutional impropriety.

"Starmer must find some backbone and root out the truth. Either his ministers or his most senior advisers acted to spike the CPS' ability to prosecute with his full knowledge, or in contempt of PM - which is it?"

Former Tory leader Sir Iain Duncan Smith pointed to areas such as UK universities' reliance on the income from Chinese students to say "we are now uniquely tied to China and its brutal regime".

"We are seen as the soft underbelly of the Western alliance," he said.

"Small wonder Downing Street does China's bidding in shutting down the spy prosecution."

Shadow justice secretary Robert Jenrick told a fringe event at the Conservative Party conference: “I think China is an enemy of this country.

“I think it’s a real, serious threat to our values, our economic and our national security, and all decisions must flow from that.

“If someone is spying on our Parliament on behalf of China, lock them up, send them to jail for a long time.”
In order to prove the case under the Official Secrets Act, prosecutors would have had to show the defendants were acting for an “enemy” – but Mr Powell reportedly revealed the government’s evidence would be based on the national security strategy, which does not use that term to describe China. … this meant Matthew Collins, the deputy national security adviser due to give evidence for the prosecution, would be unable to say Beijing was an enemy.
However, Labour ministers told prosecutors they were no longer willing to describe China as an enemy in court, causing the case to collapse in early September.

Anyone can legally spy on Britain as long as Britain doesn’t call you an enemy? Isn’t that an loophole.
 

Maikeru

Major
Registered Member
This rule probably exists to protect Americans. We know that they spy on everyone so it'd be inconvenient if any get publicly revealed in Britain.
Well supposedly part of the Five Eyes agreement is that the members don't spy on each other. Although my own theory is that, because sigint agencies like GCHQ and NSA are generally barred legally barred from internal operations, they do it to each other and trade the output. For example, NSA cannot spy on US citizens, but GCHQ can and does, then gives the results to whoever in US IC wants it. In return, NSA can keep its hands clean and truthfully say it doesn't spy internally. It would return the favour for the UK IC.
 

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General

China didn't stumble. Every country said to be alienated were acting and exploiting on part of the US and/or their own anti-China agenda. What Jack Ma did was getting over his head opening China to be vulnerable to the US. Beijing stopping him didn't do anything negative against China while doing everything negative for US interests. If Jack Ma was able to do what he was planning and then Trump and Biden did what they did, China would've got hit worse with what's happening today.

This is the problem with saying nothing, doing nothing. The US gets to write the narrative. The US said China stumbled on their own to give everyone the idea China didn't know what it was doing adding to get others not to trust China especially when it comes to economics. It gave other countries the idea, pushed by the US, that they could take on China. US allies could've stopped Trump early on if they just didn't go along. And this happened in part because China let the US write the narrative. The Chinese supposedly don't like chaos and instability and are willing to experience lesser negatives just to preserve it from happening. All that does is build it up and then when it's unleashed it's going to be something you don't like.

During the last 25 years when China started being player in the world which was where the US claims they were getting ripped-off, the US economy grew something like three times. How can they say they were ripped-off when they were exploiting that very "slave labor" in China so that the US economy can grow three times? Like I've been saying the US is upset that China made one penny out of every dollar for every iPhone that was sold. That's what they consider being ripped-off when the US should be making all the money. Like I said before the West is always looking for an angle so they can go back to having slaves.

They charge China is exploiting the US's stumbles on the world stage. Like the US doesn't do that in the reverse? The reason why the US and the West doesn't see its own hypocrisy is because the Chinese say nothing, do nothing. If only the West actually saw how much the Chinese give them a break. How much they give the West the benefit of the doubt...? That's why the Chinese should heed the their own warning that no good deed goes unpunished.
 

4Tran

Junior Member
Registered Member
Well supposedly part of the Five Eyes agreement is that the members don't spy on each other. Although my own theory is that, because sigint agencies like GCHQ and NSA are generally barred legally barred from internal operations, they do it to each other and trade the output. For example, NSA cannot spy on US citizens, but GCHQ can and does, then gives the results to whoever in US IC wants it. In return, NSA can keep its hands clean and truthfully say it doesn't spy internally. It would return the favour for the UK IC.
I'm highly skeptical of the CIA keeping their hands out of places they can reach.

They charge China is exploiting the US's stumbles on the world stage. Like the US doesn't do that in the reverse? The reason why the US and the West doesn't see its own hypocrisy is because the Chinese say nothing, do nothing. If only the West actually saw how much the Chinese give them a break. How much they give the West the benefit of the doubt...? That's why the Chinese should heed the their own warning that no good deed goes unpunished.
China's messaging doesn't matter in regards to the West because Western media doesn't report on it. That's why people in the West don't know why China wants Taiwan even though their stance has been consistent for the last five decades and has been very vocal about it all this time. The fact of the matter is that it's a mistake to try to play the game according to the rules laid out by the West and I think that China has largely given up on that.
 
Top