 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
Martin Jacques notes that Washington appears to have missed the fact that China is not simply being a reluctant partner in pressuring Iran, it is actively resisting the U.S. agenda. That, says Jacques, is because China's booming economy has allowed it greater freedom of expression on the world stage, compared with its habit, even in the recent path, to studiously avoid upsetting Washington. (Guardian, May 10, 2006)
The shaping of Public Opinion goes on. Each individual making up the total "Public" includes every individual. The stuff flowing between individuals can be accurate or not. One might wonder why that stuff is ever inaccurate on purpose.
I look for any reference, in the power struggle, mentioning China.
If I see reports suggesting that China is the new bad guy on the block, the current bogey man, the greatest threat to democracy, the most wanted terrorist, etc., then, that “News” will indicate something very significant; to me.
If any reader is currently exchanging anything with China, then, please consider posting here on this forum.
For example:
I have this program:
http://www.skype.com/helloagain.html
Skype. The whole world can talk for free
A person in China contacted me awhile ago and we exchanged typed words in our chat windows. It was, in my opinion, a very productive exchange of mutual interest leading toward peace and prosperity; despite my inability to speak any Chinese.
It is amazing what can be accomplished once borders allow free welcome and voluntary exchanges of mutual value.
Another example might be someone who is currently playing on-line multiplayer games with anyone living in China. More of that will certainly reduce any future tension between people living in China and people living in the U.S. or anywhere for that matter.
If anyone claims to be responsible for severing free and welcome communication channels, then, they are obviously claiming to be the cause of tension.
For example:
Claiming to sever free and welcome communication channels because one claims that those channels are 'trading with the enemy' is falsifying communication which is, in fact, a severing of free and welcome communication channels.
Ask:
Do I want to be lied to and how much am I willing to give up while maintaining the flow of lies?