Libya = Pentagon Vs China

China's interests in Libya, which supplies 3-5% of its oil, also act as a gateway to its tens of billions of dollars worth of investments across Africa in mining, infrastructure development and oil & gas.

Asia Time's Pepe Escobar :

"The Muslim Brotherhood is a weaponised, ideological arm of Saudi Arabia."

"The problem is there are different Washington agendas, White House, national security agencies, the CIA, the Pentagon."

"The next domino to fall, if we follow the agenda established by the Pentagon is Syria....The Pentagon is basically the Africa agenda, they want to win the war in Libya, install a Africa base in Africa....then there are the dominoes, Libya, Ivory Coast, Eritrea, Zimbabwe, Somalia. So these are the next dominoes to fall, according to the Africa Pentagon agenda. Then later on the big dominoes would the countries where China has substantial interests. Example, Angola, Algeria, Nigeria, Equatorial Guinea...."

"China...their counter strategy, if they see they're foundering in Africa....they would renew their ties with South America and Central Asia..."

Citing America's Violence, Torture and Racism, China Tells the U.S. To Shut Its Yapper About Human Rights

Apparently, the People's Republic of China has had just about enough of the pot calling the kettle black so they have requested that America stop pointing any fingers at them regarding human rights.

From the story over at Reuters via Breitbart:

The United States is beset by violence, racism and torture and has no authority to condemn other governments' human rights problems, China said on Sunday, countering U.S. criticism of Beijing's crackdown.

The row between Beijing and Washington over human rights has intensified since China's ruling Communist Party extended its clampdown on dissidents and rights activists, a move which has sparked an outcry from Washington and other Western governments.

Chinese artist Ai Weiwei is the most prominent of the activists to be detained by police or held in secretive custody in the latest crackdown.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on Friday she was "deeply concerned" about it, and cited "negative trends" including Ai's detention.

You know, you'd have to be deaf, dumb and blind to not notice how the entire world had caught onto the fact that Barack Hussein Obama has set up America to be the whipping post for the entire world right now. I remember a day when many countries would think twice about pissing off America - either they feared a sort of isolation economically or they feared a cut in their foreign aid or they even feared some sort of military action but not now, not with the Great Apologist at the helm of this country. No, now it's the international sport of using America as a punching bag and knowing damn well that they can get away with it.

To think that China would seriously make a claim of racism and violence and torture in the United States as a reason why the atrocities going on in that country should be ignored is almost laughable.

But you know, I guess if the Chinese are watching certain video clips of America...you know, like clips of Obama's pastor saying that G_d damns America....or Obama's friend having bombed the Pentagon in his past.....well, perhaps that is where they get these crazy notions.

We have China calling us "racist", we have the likes of Iran calling us "The Great Satan", we have Venezuela taunting us at every turn and we even have a Mexican president standing on our soil degrading our country and we wonder what in the world happened? Remember the claim that electing Barack Hussein Obama to the White House post would make all of the world like America again? Well, I guess the strategy of Obama to make America out as the bad guy in all of the world's problems has backfired....you see, none of the world's leaders have taken in those apologies and said "boy, America is really humble now, we like them"....ummm...no...they have said "the once great America is now a sniveling, weak-kneed coward so let's take this chance to pummel the shit out of them."

China tells U.S. to quit as human rights judge


(Reuters) - The United States is beset by violence, racism and torture and has no authority to condemn other governments' human rights problems, China said on Sunday, countering U.S. criticism of Beijing's crackdown.

The row between Beijing and Washington over human rights has intensified since China's ruling Communist Party extended its clampdown on dissidents and rights activists, a move which has sparked an outcry from Washington and other Western governments.

Chinese artist Ai Weiwei is the most prominent of the activists to be detained by police or held in secretive custody in the latest crackdown.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on Friday she was "deeply concerned" about it, and cited "negative trends" including Ai's detention.

A U.S. State Department report on global human rights released on Friday said Beijing had stepped up restrictions on lawyers, activists, bloggers and journalists, and tightened controls on civil society.

It has also increased its efforts to control the press, Internet and Internet access, the report said.

But China has shown no sign of bowing to foreign pressure.

Its Foreign Ministry on Saturday dismissed the U.S. report as meddling, and its own annual report about U.S. human rights stressed Beijing's dismissive view.

"Stop the domineering behavior of exploiting human rights to interfere in the internal affairs of other countries," it said, according to excerpts published by the official Xinhua news agency.

"The United States ignores its own severe human rights problems, ardently promoting its so-called 'human rights diplomacy', treating human rights as a political tool to vilify other countries and to advance its own strategic interests," said a passage from the Chinese report

Produced by the State Council Information Office, the government's public relations arm, the report dwelled on what it said were severe deprivations and threats facing many Americans, as well as Washington's invasion of Iraq.

It also cited the United States' refusal to ratify a number of international human rights pacts, and listed poverty, hunger and homelessness as stains on the country's rights record.

"The United States is the world's worst country for violent crimes," said the report. "Citizens' lives, property and personal safety do not receive the protection they should."

"Racial discrimination is deeply rooted in the United States, permeating every aspect of social life," it said.

Criticism of China's human rights problems do not come just from foreign governments and groups.

Chinese rights lawyers and advocates have also been dismayed by a recent burst of arrests, detentions and heavy sentences against dissidents and activists.

On Sunday, hundreds of Chinese police moved to prevent a planned outdoor service by a church in Beijing that had been evicted from its former premises.

China white paper highlights US military 'competition'

China says military competition in the Asia-Pacific region remains fierce

By Michael BristowBBC News, Beijing

Continue reading the main story

Related Stories

• China beefs up military spending
• Viewpoint: New Sino-US arms race?
• China seeks to ease US concerns

China says the United States is increasing its military presence in the Asia-Pacific region, which is becoming more "volatile".

It also says there has been a rise in operations directed against China.

The views were made in China's National Defence white paper, issued by the government.

The paper outlines the country's current views on security issues and gives an overview of its military forces.

Fierce competition

In the document, released on Thursday, China gives a downbeat assessment of the regional security situation.

"Profound changes are taking shape in the Asia-Pacific strategic landscape. Relevant major powers are increasing their strategic investment," it says.

"International military competition remains fierce."

The document singles out the United States. According to China, it is reinforcing military alliances and getting more involved in regional affairs.

Beijing also says foreigners are now more suspicious of China - and have increased "interference and countering moves" against it.

Relations between China and the United States, particularly on military matters, have been strained over recent years.

That tension eased slightly following Chinese President Hu Jintao's state visit to the United States earlier this year.

But the potential for disagreement remains high.

"We admit that our military ties continue to face difficulties and challenges," said Colonel Geng Yansheng, spokesman for the Ministry of Defence, at a press conference to launch the white paper.

No issue threatens the relationship more that US support for Taiwan, a self-governing island off China's eastern coast that Beijing considers its own.

"The United States continues to sell weapons to Taiwan, severely impeding Sino-US relations," says the white paper.

Col Geng made it clear that the two countries must respect each other's core interests. For China, that includes Taiwan.

"China is willing to work with the US, based on respect, trust, equality and mutual benefits," he said.

The United States and some of China's neighbours occasionally express their concerns about the ultimate aim of Beijing's military modernisation.

But the white paper reiterates that no one has anything to fear.

It says China's armed forced, known as the People's Liberation Army, are there purely to defend the country.

China, it says, has a strategy of "attacking only after being attacked"

A Foreign Policy Doctrine Echoing Reagan’s

Original essay by Benyamin Korn

(Benyamin Korn, former executive editor of the Philadelphia Jewish Exponent, is director of Jewish Americans for Sarah Palin andJewsForSarah.com.)

A Republican former governor, solidly pro-Israel, is running for the White House, but mocked by the pundits for allegedly lacking foreign policy expertise – yet ends up time and again being proved right on the major international issues of the day. Thinking Ronald Reagan?

Try Sarah Palin.

Nearly one month ago, the incumbent GOP vice presidential candidate became the first major American political figure to call for imposing a no-fly zone over Libya. Finally, in the past week, Palin’s idea was adopted by – in quick succession – the Arab League, the UN Security Council, and President Obama. Finally this week allied ordnance began striking Moammar Qaddhafi’s forces. Let’s hope it’s not too late.

Libya is just the latest major foreign policy challenge where Gov. Palin has confounded her detractors and demonstrated that, just as with Reagan, good instincts and a sound worldview are what count when a leader’s telephone rings at 3:00 a.m.

The Palin Doctrine –

allies should be supported,

dictators reviled,

terrorists hunted down

and enemies defeated

We call it the Palin Doctrine. It’s based on the principles that allies should be supported, dictators reviled, terrorists hunted down and enemies defeated. It also means the western world will not stand by at the bloody repression of a democratic revolution.

These notions might be self-evident to some, but they’re not to President Obama, who cannot bring himself even to utter the words “Islamist” and “terrorist” in the same sentence. One of his top intelligence officials actually told Congress last month that the Muslim Brotherhood is a “largely secular” organization. Ms. Palin, by contrast, denounced as a “shame” the administration’s offer to the Brotherhood of a seat at the table of power in Egypt’s newly evolving system.

Last week Governor and Mr. Palin were in New Delhi where she delivered the keynote address at a high-level political conclave. As the first visit to south Asia by a potential 2012 GOP contender, her attention was welcomed in a democracy justifiably concerned about the unstable behavior of Pakistan, its nuclear-armed neighbor to the northwest, and a China rapidly arming, under a regime where state capitalism and rigid control of political power go hand-in-hand.

The Palins’ stopover in Israel likewise came at a critical moment. In the wake of the Itamar massacre and the renewed rocket attacks on Israel from Gaza, Gov. Palin expressed only solidarity, even wearing a Star of David during her tours. She promised to return soon for a longer visit.

Contrast that with the behavior of Mr. Obama, who has yet, as President, even to visit the Jewish state, pays only lip service to the threat of ceaseless Palestinian incitement, and has returned to carping about the “illegitimacy” of Jews building houses where they already live.

Most important for the long term, Mrs. Palin has extensive experience administering energy policy, and proven success in tough negotiations with the giant energy firms, and the former Alaska governor always links U.S. security interests with “responsible development” of America’s abundant fuel resources.

The president’s most effective critic recently declared that his “war on domestic oil and gas exploration and production has caused us pain at the pump, endangered our already sluggish economic recovery, and threatened our national security.” In her India address Mrs. Palin chastised the White House aversion to energy development as a form of “social engineering.”

Jimmy Carter’s foreign policy was marked by indecision, weakness, and a the abandonment of long-standing U.S. Allies. The resolute Reagan Doctrine of peace through strength restored America’s standing in the world and brought down the Soviet empire without firing a shot. Barack Obama’s foreign policy is looking more like Carter’s every day. And Sarah Palin’s looks more and more like Reagan’s.

h/t: http://jewsforsarah.com/?p=8121

James Clapper "NIA" Director: "Iran/N.Korea Not Enemies, Qaddafi Will Win".

China Ramps up Controls against Protesters and Journalists

Litigating IP in China: a word of advice regarding evidence and proof

No-one handed the corporate seal over, so he took
himself off to the sea-side for a little break

The importance of adequate preparation of one's evidence in IP or indeed any other litigation is so blindingly obvious that we should never need to be reminded of it.  However, the IPKat's talented friend Paul Jones (Jones & Co., Toronto) has just drawn his attention to the good news that the need to get one's evidence property sorted out has been recognised as far afield as China.  This is illustrated by a decision of the Beijing No.1 Intermediate People’s Court dated December 10, 2010 and posted online here on 29 January of this year, According to Paul, 

"The plaintiff was a Taiwanese company that had a trade mark, ZHENGLIN & Design, that it used in Taiwan. In the early nineties the principal of the Taiwanese company, Lin Ken, incorporated a company called Lanzhou Zhenglin Land Reclamation Food Co., Ltd. (兰州正林农垦食品有限公司 -- “Lanzhou Zhenglin”) with some local partners in Gansu Province, a poor province in the north west, along the route of the old silk road, in order the develop supplies for export and for the PRC market. The PRC company registered the mark in China.

There was a falling out and in August of 2007 the principal of the Taiwanese company, Lin Ken, was removed as President. He disputed that decision and refused to hand over the corporate seal. In China the corporate seal or “chop” is a very important indicator of the authority of the corporation, unlike in North America.

The plaintiff then claimed that the PRC company, Lanzhou Zhenglin, should not continue to use the marks. The plaintiff claimed that the right of Lanzhou Zhenglin to register the marks in the PRC was based on an “Authorization Letter” and Trademark License and Renewal Letters dated 1993, 1999, 2004 and 2008. He presented copies of the letters to the court. But he lost. 

Article 49 of a Supreme People’s Court rules on evidence of 2001 provides that the other party has the right to demand that the original document be submitted. But all Mr. Ken submitted was a photocopy notarized by a law firm in Taiwan in 2008. The Taiwanese law firm carefully limited its authentication to the signature and seal. It did not say that it had compared the copy to the original and that they were the same. It did not talk about the dates on the letters. Interestingly the letters were also stamped with the seal of Lanzhou Zhenglin, the seal that Lin Ken had refused to hands over in 2007.

The Plaintiff claimed that the originals of the letters were in the office of Lanzhou Zhenglin, to which it had no access. In the PRC courts there is no discovery as there is in North America and the defendant was under no obligation to produce evidence to help the Plaintiff. The plaintiff also claimed that a copy was in his home in Lanzhou (the capital of Gansu Province), but the documents there had been seized by the police as part of an action against him regarding misappropriation of the assets of Lanzhou Zhenglin. Interestingly the police records did not show that such letters were among the items seized.

Article 69(4) of the SPC rules on evidence states that photocopies may not be used as evidence if they cannot be verified as against the original. Mr. Ken lost his claim for the trade marks in the PRC.

Were there ever such  authorization letters? Certainly it is not uncommon for business people to forget about such details when setting up a company that they control. But even if the letter existed, the plaintiff did not take the necessary steps at the time that the letters were written to ensure that they would be effective evidence in court.  Remember that in China, as in many other civil law jurisdictions, there is no discovery in litigation. You have to collect your own evidence, usually before you start the lawsuit.

So when the agreements are entered into the parties should have them notarized in China. They should be careful to ensure that the “legal representative” (法定代表人) signs on behalf of the Chinese company. The legal representative can be held personally responsible for the actions of the corporation. There is no similar concept in North America. And use a seal. If your company does not have one – buy one.  Finally trade mark licences and other IP licences should be registered. That was obviously not done in this case.

In China litigation generally is all (or at least mostly) about the evidence. The court rely more on documents than they do on oral testimony. And the rules of evidence and the courts are stricter about documentary evidence than in North America. And there is no discovery to help you out.

So the rule in Chinese litigation is “Be Prepared.”

Says laden ladenfam, much has been said about the difficulties of enforcing IP rights in China -- but the usual story for a very long time has been that it's somehow always the fault of the Chinese and their system.  One rarely hears people saying that the reason why they lost was that they had failed to comply with local rules, gather the necessary documentary or other evidence etc.  Absence of a procedure for discovery may be thought to be a nuisance or a misfortune by some, but there are plenty of reputable jurisdictions that manage without it -- Germany, for one, is not exactly a paradise for those seeking discovery.  This little tale should be taken to heart; it contains some sound advice.

Seal recipes here and here

Why do Chinese academics file so many patents?

A few weeks ago this Kat published her first report from the Global Forum on Intellectual Property. This report included a summary of Professor Williamson's (University of Oxford) presentation which showed a variety of pie charts, one of which that indicated that as much as 23% of patents applied for were from academic institutions in China, compared with only 7% in the US. This Kat, now fervently watching the academic patent debate with the Stanford v Roche patent battle now before the Supreme Court (reports here and here), asked whether readers could explain why there was such a higher per cent of academics filing patents in China. laden ladenfam called and her lovely readers answered in the form of Michael Lin of Marks & Clerk (Hong Kong). Writing from his personal opinion and not in his professional capacity, Michael says this:

"The reasons why you are seeing such a large increase in Chinese Patents filed by Academics is that for them 1) it's free and 2) they get academic credit for it. Filing patents is encouraged by the Chinese Government and Academia. The Chinese Government has given Universities (as well as local companies) funds for filing patents in order to spur innovation - one measure of which is the number of patents filed by China, as a country. Also, the Chinese Universities are ranked against each other according to how many patents they've filed. As a result, Chinese Universities have adjusted their tenure requirements and expectations such that professors who want to advance are virtually required to file patents as well as to publish papers. In one specific University I know of, filing a patent is "worth" 3 published papers. This practice has been around for at least 2.5 years. Thus you are seeing (proportionally) a very large number of Chinese Academics filing patent applications in China.

Notice all of this relates to filing patent applications - there is no discussion above about actually getting them granted, or any other such matters.

This is also a major factor as to why there is such an amazing increase in Chinese Patent filings (in the Chinese Patent Office) in 2008-10, while filings everywhere else in the world were dropping."

The reason for these incentives could be tri-fold. Economically the programs of incentives are part of China's 50-year technology plan which is confirmed by the National Patent Development Strategy released a few weeks ago (click here to see the English translation). Politically, being able to show an increasing number of patent filings to the rest of the world can be seen to legitimize China's dedication to IP and IP protection - an area which they are oft-criticized. The third reason is that socially, the Chinese Government realizes that it is essential to shift from a manufacturing economy to a research & development economy, which may help pacify rising dissent in the countryside. By increasing, or at least showing, an increasing level of innovation this may also instil in the Chinese public a sense of pride and nationalism (see, the Beijing Olympics).


What is missing from the data, and as laden ladenfam identified during Professor Williamson's speech is how many of these filings result in grants? Further, how many of those grants enter countries via the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT)? Do such numbers exist?

And what do UK and US academics think about a system where their academic standing can be judged by how many patents one files?

laden ladenfam would like to thank Michael for his e-mails and invaluable insight into an area that many of us on this side of the world seldom have an opportunity to explore.

State-manufactured reality slips in China, to reveal ugly truths :

Xia's journalism lecture included other examples of Xinhua's work, notably coverage of ethnic rioting in the far west of China last summer that left nearly 200 people dead.

Xia explained how Xinhua concealed the true horror of the unrest for fear that it would set off violence beyond Urumqi, the capital of the Xinjiang region. Rioters burned bus passengers alive, he told the class, raped women and decapitated children.

.

China Fires Back At US Over Human Rights : "The US Citizens' Freedom To Access & Distribute Information Is Under Strict Supervision"

China has compiled a detailed, well sourced report on human rights' violations in the United States, through 2008-2009. It makes for some very interesting reading, not only for the view China expresses of the United States, but for the vast number of human rights' violations listed, and the massive amount of general criminality it exposes.

Reading all this about the United States from inside China would make the US sound a quite scary, freedom-restricted, dangerous place. Much like the way China is portrayed by some or most of the commercial American media.

An excerpt :

Chaotic management of prisons in the United State also led to wide spread of diseases among the inmates.

A report by the Human Rights Watch released in March 2009 said although the New York State prison registered the highest number of prisoners living with HIV in the country, it did not provide the inmates with adequate access to treatment, and even locked the inmates up separately, refusing to provide them with treatment of any kind. (www.hrw.org, March 24, 2009).

While advocating "freedom of speech," "freedom of the press" and "Internet freedom," the U.S. government unscrupulously monitors and restricts the citizens' rights to freedom when it comes to its own interests and needs.

The U.S. citizens' freedom to access and distribute information is under strict supervision. According to media reports, the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) started installing specialized eavesdropping equipment around the country to wiretap calls, faxes, and emails and collect domestic communications as early as 2001. The wiretapping programs was originally targeted at Arab-Americans, but soon grew to include other Americans. The NSA installed over 25 eavesdropping facilities in San Jose, San Diego, Seattle, Los Angeles, and Chicago among other cities. The NSA also announced recently it was building a huge one million square feet data warehouse at a cost of 1.5 billion U.S. dollars at Camp Williams in Utah, as well as another massive data warehouse in San Antonio, as part of the NSA's new Cyber Command responsibilities. The report said a man named Nacchio was convicted on 19 counts of insider trading and sentenced to six years in prison after he refused to participate in NSA's surveillance program (http://www.onelinejournal.com, November 23, 2009).

After the September 11 attack, the U.S. government, in the name of anti-terrorism, authorized its intelligence authorities to hack into its citizens' mail communications, and to monitor and erase any information that might threaten the U.S. national interests on the Internet through technical means. The country's Patriot Act allowed law enforcement agencies to search telephone, email communications, medical, financial and other records, and broadened the discretion of law enforcement and immigration authorities in detaining and deporting foreign persons suspected of terrorism-related acts. The Act expanded the definition of terrorism, thus enlarging the number of activities to which law enforcement powers could be applied. On July 9, 2008, the U.S. Senate passed the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Amendments Act of 2008, granting legal immunity to telecommunication companies that take part in wiretapping programs and authorizing the government to wiretap international communications between the United States and people overseas for anti-terrorism purposes without court approval (The New York Times, July 10, 2008). Statistic showed that from 2002 to 2006, the FBI collected thousands of phones records of U.S. citizens through mails, notes and phone calls. In September 2009, the country set up an Internet security supervision body, further worrying U.S. citizens that the U.S. government might use Internet security as an excuse to monitor and interfere with personal systems. A U.S. government official told the New York Times in an interview in April 2009 that NSA had intercepted private email messages and phone calls of Americans in recent months on a scale that went beyond the broad legal limits established by U.S. Congress the year before. In addition, the NSA was also eavesdropping on phones of foreign political figures, officials of international organizations and renowned journalists (The New York Times, April, 15, 2009). The U.S. military also participated in the eavesdropping programs. According to CNN reports, a Virginia-based U.S. military Internet risk evaluation organization was in charge of monitoring official and unofficial private blogs, official documents, personal contact information, photos of weapons, entrances of military camps, as well as other websites that "might threaten its national security."

The so-called "freedom of the press" of the United States was in fact completely subordinate to its national interests, and was manipulated by the U.S. government. According to media reports, the U.S. government and the Pentagon had recruited a number of former military officers to become TV and radio news commentators to give "positive comments" and analysis as "military experts" for the U.S. war in Iraq and Afghanistan, in order to guide public opinions, glorify the wars, and gain public support of its anti-terrorism ideology (The New York Times, April 20, 2009). At yearend 2009, the U.S. Congress passed a bill which imposed sanctions on several Arab satellite channels for broadcasting contents hostile to the U.S. and instigating violence (http://blogs.rnw.nl). In September 2009, protesters using the social-networking site Twitter and text messages to coordinate demonstrations clashed with the police several times in Pittsburgh, where the Group of 20 summit was held. Elliot Madison, 41, was later charged with hindering apprehension of the protesters through the Internet. The police also searched his home (http://www.nytimes.com, October 5, 2009). Vic Walczak, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania, said the same conduct in other countries would be called human rights violations whereas in the United States it was called necessary crime control.

The Full Report Is Here

A beautiful new Chinese city for one million people, built in five years to maintain 8% GDP growth and soak up stimulus spending, stands empty :