On the 17th local time, the BBC program invited Luo Guancong, a Hong Kong disruptor, and Gao Zhikai, an expert on international relations in China, to discuss Hong Kong issues. Luo Guancong declared that the violent demonstrations in Hong Kong were “peaceful” and stated that the British government should withdraw the British judges in Hong Kong and sanction Hong Kong officials. Gao Zhikai “full firepower” and continuously “output”, Luo Guancong once showed fear and nervous smile. (Haike News)

The BBC openly let Luo Guancong appear as a guest on the show and invited Chinese scholars to have a conversation. What is this called, this is called riding on your face and shit. Some people say, ah, when you talk about a fugitive from a political asylum, this will only make people feel funny and get caught in the trap. They want this effect. I’m sorry, whether it’s funny or not is based on strength. The same sentence: The United States is not qualified to speak to China from its position of strength. The mainstream media across the United States were quiet about this. If the North Koreans said this, it is estimated that the news talk show in the United States can be played for a week in the next second. Then you ask Blinken why he doesn’t laugh? If Luo Guancong is going to CNN, maybe we are going to say it differently, BBC, please, what are you in Britain, do you want to point at the Chinese nose to curse? Are you an American wild dad? I think the Chinese must not simply understand the West as a whole, otherwise they will seriously misjudge the strength of the other side. The United States is the United States, the European Union is the European Union, and the United Kingdom is the United Kingdom. Is it possible that the United Kingdom intends to become the world’s third pole with China and the United States? You, the BBC, have not been honest since 19 years. They have been involved in the China issue. You have the Hong Kong issue and you have the Xinjiang issue. CNN is not as active as you. Is it possible that the Democratic Party has also entered your British shares? So the question is how to make Britain understand that he does not have the natural right to dictate to China? The best way is to go straight and straight. It is a strength hedge. You are a fugitive or a fugitive. What kind of language skills and diplomatic rhetoric? Do we still need to consider the feelings of the British? How fresh is it? Only when Britain felt the pain under this kind of pure power oppression, can he recall the fear of being dominated by the Soviet Union and understand what the battlefield of the superpower is. In the show, Luo Guancong’s expression was obviously wrong when he heard what the Chinese scholar said. It was neither sarcasm nor anger but nervousness. The words of the Chinese scholar greatly exceeded Luo’s expectations and stimulated his nerves: How long can Britain protect him? ten years? Twenty years? If China continues to rise, where will he be truly safe? How long can he keep everything he got now? Does he really understand the government he wants to challenge? Luo Guancong is a fugitive, and a fugitive is a fugitive. What can I explain to you? Back then, the United States used laundry detergent to kill the whole family. I am willing to tell you the truth and it is the kingly way. Believe it or not, what if you don’t?


By zhiwo

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Notify of
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
6 months ago

Gao Zhikai is right, Luo Guancong is indeed a fugitive. On July 2, 2020, Luo Guancong left Hong Kong before the Hong Kong National Security Law took effect, and made a “parting” remark: “I don’t know when the return journey will be due to this farewell.” “May he be lucky to come back half his life, and he is still the one. A young man who has never forgotten his original intention. May Hong Kong be well and may the glory come soon.” On the evening of the 13th, Luo Guancong announced through his social account that he was in exile in London, England. Although he was like a bereaved dog, he was still on the 21st under the arrangement of the American Embassy. The U.S. Secretary of State Pompeo met and called on the international community to “connect as one line to fight against China’s authoritarian expansion.” On July 31, the Hong Kong police allegedly wanted Luo Guancong in violation of the “Hong Kong National Security Law” for “inciting secession, colluding with foreign or foreign forces to endanger national security”. But so what? Now Luo Guancong, Huang Zhifeng and others have been praised by the West as “social democratic activists”, and China’s image in the West has been stigmatized as “genocide.” The BBC put out the chess piece Luo Guancong and invited Chinese scholars. It is nothing more than using the hostile parties to earn eyeballs and traffic, in a seemingly fair way to help Luo Guancong increase public exposure. And on April 7, 2021, the United Kingdom has announced that it will grant Luo Guancong political asylum. It can be said that as long as Luo Guancong does not step into the scope of China’s sovereignty during his lifetime, we cannot do anything about him. Therefore, Luo Guancong’s laugh was not embarrassment, but uncontrollable arrogance, and even more ecstasy of escaping from the legal trial and irony of Gao Zhikai’s remarks. As for the British host, he was not listening at all. Instead of expending energy and scolding Luo Guancong, it is better to solve Luo Guancong’s problems fundamentally. Luo Guancong was born in Shenzhen and his ancestral home is Shanwei, Guangdong. He studied in a pro-Mainland school in Hong Kong, but eventually became a separatist. It can be said that this is completely the poison of education in the West. But it is undoubtedly a kind of irony that such a person is elected legislative council member grandiosely. Therefore, in Hong Kong, one is education, and the other is elections. Starting from these two issues and gradually advancing, there will be no more waste greens being used by Luo Guancong and others, and Huang Zhifeng and the like will no longer be produced. Luo Guancong and others will also be thorough. Become an abandoned child completely. At that time, Luo Guancong probably didn’t even have the opportunity to smile embarrassingly in front of the camera, making him like a chicken rib, eating useless, a pity to discard it. This is the best counterattack.

6 months ago

To be honest, I think the BBC has only one reason for being set off by this Mr. Gao more than once: deliberately. “If the BBC believes in such accusations, then the BBC is not reporting the truth. You really need to do your homework.” Gao Zhikai accused the BBC of fabricating a lie to all mankind by falsifying the actual situation in China. He said that the BBC should Do better, investigate the facts, rather than listen to others. However, the host didn’t seem to buy it, biting on the data of “1 million people”, and asked if Gao Zhikai was unwilling to admit this number. “Who made up the data of 1 million people out of thin air?” “What did he do?” “What research did he do?” “Have you been to Xinjiang?” Silian asked the host to get stuck at one point, in order to avoid answering questions directly. , The BBC host hurriedly changed the subject, using the old trick “others say…” and accusing China of “low transparency”, refocusing the spear on Xinjiang and throwing out what she believes to be the truth, “After all, not all reporters can Into the Xinjiang region”. Obviously, this statement was immediately opposed by Gao Zhikai, “No, I don’t think so. I believe that Xinjiang opens its doors to all diplomats, international organizations and journalists.” He emphasized, “We welcome true and objective people very much. Came to Xinjiang. On the other hand, we don’t welcome journalists who are already biased. For those who just want to blame the Chinese government and the Chinese people, I’m sorry, we don’t need such journalists, they didn’t do it. Good job, they are lying to all mankind!”

6 months ago

I want to add a few words to Gao Zhikai: Luo Guancong is not only a fugitive, but also a traitor. If a person has different opinions on everything, including how to govern your country, how the system works, etc., this is normal. As long as they express their different opinions within a legal framework, it is completely acceptable. If a person has different opinions, expresses them in a constructive way, and puts forward meaningful and implementable suggestions and opinions, we will welcome them. However, if it destroys the national and people’s interests in a destructive way, especially colluding with foreign hostile forces, no matter what beautiful guise it is, it will be regarded as a traitor. This is not only a question of Chinese culture, but also a question of human justice in any country. The most ridiculous thing is that Luo Guancong only got one refugee status in the UK. I don’t know if he is very disappointed in his heart. Considering that the West regards him as a “democracy fighter.” I thought he would be granted citizenship and knighthood. I think that when a person loses use value, Western countries will treat him as rubbish and throw him into the trash can.

6 months ago

It makes a lot of sense. On the technical level, you really have to be careful to fall into the other side’s speech trap. What I want to emphasize is not that these clowns violate the laws of one country, but that they must directly expose the hypocrisy of these clowns and portray them in the direction of “people are outraged.” These clowns are not glorious “dissidents” at all, but shameless political speculators who rely on the bloodshed of others (especially the bottom of society) to accumulate political capital for themselves, and are ready to sacrifice their “comrades” to achieve their own achievements. Preparation. Their greatest principle is that “a friend who is dead will never die of a poor way.” Such people are maggots that erode society wherever they go. When it is in their interests to criticize or even harm the “asylum” country, they will switch their personal image without hesitation and pretend to be a victim of innocent kidnapping by the party who once gave them “asylum”. If any normal people and society want to avoid being sucked by them, the best way is to stay away from them.
The current shortcomings of our propaganda and public opinion fronts are focused on how to speak what leaders love to hear through the years of training, so that not only foreign people can understand what we can’t say, even Chinese people can understand what we can’t say. Up.
If the struggle between propaganda and public opinion can really be solved by bombing and building ships, that would be a good thing-simple. Unfortunately, reality often backfires. This is a technical job. But just like other technical jobs, if you have good skills, you have never done it before and can be a leader.
Why have I been relatively silently disgusted with these arguments that advocate bombing and building ships, because what they say is “correct” nonsense. It is like saying “a certain compound can kill all cells, so a certain compound can treat cancer.” It’s okay to listen to this kind of words occasionally, but if there are too many people who believe, they will fall into a kind of “proud laziness”, not solving the real problems in the real world, but lying in their own illusory world and muttering. With “Shipbuilding, Shipbuilding…”
Real problems will not be “mumbled” well.

6 months ago

This is actually a very good phenomenon: more and more people in China have mastered Western communication skills, especially when facing Western media. What you see is right, it is to be the first to speak out regardless of the order of the sentences, or to talk endlessly, so that the other party can’t speak. Yes, the other party may be able to refute the punch line. But most of the time you don’t give others a chance to interrupt, just keep talking, at least you have finished expressing your point of view. This is similar to what Westerners say that children who will be called to have milk to eat, a reason. I remember that there were always Indian classmates in the school, especially the Indian-British people. They dominated the classroom speeches in each class. The students who are native English-speaking students in the United States and the United States can not be compared. They all went well in finding jobs in the end. McKinsey came to our place to recruit people, and an Indian guy ran to our Greater China table in a daze, hey, hey all night, and monopolized the ears of McKinsey’s representatives. As a result, his wish was fulfilled, and he was hired alone. In order to take care of him, McKinsey put him in the Seoul office. In fact, arguing and talking endlessly, speaking more or less with some authority, can also quickly catch others’ dreadlocks. Chinese people should adopt Mr. Gao’s attitude towards the outside world. As long as they have ideas, they are not afraid of making mistakes.

6 months ago

After watching the original film, in fact, as far as the effects of the program are concerned, it is completely different, there is no confrontation at all, and it is very lively: Gao said, “There is no peaceful parade, there is a lot of violence”, Luo said, “It is all peaceful. “There is no violence.” These questions are actually not strong, and Luo is not afraid. What is Luo really afraid of? In fact, it’s a question of whether to cut off from the brave faction (the yellow helmet and black organization that is really violent). There was a question that embarrassed Luo during an interview with BBC: Is there any brave faction? If there are brave factions, is it still a peaceful demonstration? Luo was very embarrassed at that time. He did not dare to say that there were no brave factions, because that would be tantamount to cutting the seat; he did not dare to say that the demonstration was not peaceful, because that would be tantamount to overthrowing the previous position; so he could only consider him, “hk The police are more violent, so we can’t help it.” The scene is very funny. So in the future, if there are guests going up, just use this question directly. It doesn’t need to say whether it is a fugitive or illegal. These are meaningless.

6 months ago

Really big guy. This eloquence, this reaction speed. This is one of the reasons why some people earn more than tens of millions of dollars in annual salary, and some people can only maintain adequate food and clothing. Of course, many of the people who have got high salaries and are in high positions are indeed hardcore, not much better than cats and dogs. The tall boss obviously deserves his name. The tall guy is a translator for the chief designer. What scene has not been seen. This is like what Jin Lao said about Professor Gao, reading too few books and seeing too few scenes, so there are some naive remarks (to the effect). It seems that Zhang from Fudan has also done the translation for the head office. So some people sound like violent arguments, but in fact, someone in the logical chain has experienced inconvenience to you and talked about things that you couldn’t understand. Thinking of it, a nerd used to comment that Emperor Xuanzong returned to Chang’an and had a good time with Suzong. We know how ridiculous the self-righteous nerd is. It’s just that there are too few things to read and too few scenes.

6 months ago

In fact, news and public opinion are mainly for people in China. U.S. imperialism is shown to the Americans, and China is shown to the Chinese. The problem in the past was that the Chinese people did not trust their own country, but were full of yearning for the U.S. imperialism. They believed that the U.S. imperial media was all magnificent and righteous. Now the people of both China and the U.S. know that their media is fart, without credibility, and they can even look at the news the other way around. This is also an excellent thing for our country. U.S. emperors, just keep on making fakes, let’s watch the show

6 months ago

“Luo Guancong once showed an awkward smile of fear and tension”-I’m afraid I didn’t see the fear, but the tension and embarrassment were very obvious. I watched a few videos of Gao Zhikai’s participation in the debate. The characteristic of this old man is that he is unstoppable when he breaks out. No matter how the line or the interviewer tried to interrupt him, he would express his core ideas aloud with emotion, and he would really be stunned. For example, before he was in line with the BBC, the BBC asked whether China would allow BBC media people to interview in Xinjiang. In addition to being official, Gao Zhikai finally came up with a sentence: If the UK can solve the CGTV license issue, China will also solve the BBC related issues. problem. Another example is the incident mentioned today. Gao Zhikai also stated that “the act of attacking government units is illegal in any country. If the British think that Luo Guancong’s behavior in Hong Kong is okay, then dare to do the same in the UK? “If Britain imposes sanctions on China, China will impose sanctions on the United Kingdom. This is a world that respects equal sovereignty.” You can see one of Gao Zhikai’s debating skills: I don’t talk to you about the big reason. As we all know, once you get the big reason, you will enter the “self-speaking” part, especially considering that you like to run fast. Selective reporting, how do you win by talking about it? So another way of thinking: What do you support, then I will do it again on you, it is very fair, fools can understand, and all think it is feasible, right? This drove the two sides to enclose themselves and force them to the same issue that neither side had any reason to avoid. The question discussed in the live broadcast has also changed from “competing for the right to interpret something” to “is your country superior to others?”, or “do you have two standards?” in the comment area. In the past, the Chinese guests were tired of clarifying and explaining in the program, but now Gao Zhikai took the initiative to throw the cross-examination to the other side—”You want to prove that Luo Guancong’s behavior in Hong Kong is okay. I will not fight with you. We have evidence to come. To prove what he did, we also have your information on suppressing the demonstrators. Now we are going to do exactly the same in London. Do you support me? Do you support me? Do you support me, do you believe me? I will take a tablet and broadcast a few videos right away? You If you don’t support me, then do you support Luo Guancong to dry chicken feathers?” This is why Luo Guancong and the BBC reporters are more nervous and embarrassed. It seems that I don’t know much about Gao Zhikai. Let’s go to the video, which I did before Guanwang.

6 months ago

With the continuous rise of China and the continuous improvement of China’s international status, I believe that the world public opinion system dominated by Europe and the United States will disgust you for a long time! This is an arduous struggle, and it is also an ongoing struggle. On the one hand, it shows that Western society has a sense of fear for China’s rise, and this sense of fear is not a threat to China itself (of course, Western society has always regarded China’s rise as a threat). But because of their original sin, the process of their development is to continuously export wars, which are brought through colonial rule. As for China, we have risen completely by our own development and hard work. They have never experienced this kind of development model. Therefore, they have always been suspicious of China’s suppression of human rights (the issue of slandering Xinjiang cotton is actually I have a history of slavery), on the other side I am afraid. They used to be highly confident about their ownism, or the system they were advocating, but compared to today’s China following its own socialist road, they more or less doubted their own path. But the paradox of their vacillation or suspicion is that they do not examine their own problems or summarize the crisis they have emerged. They are sick themselves, but they force China to take medicine. On the one hand, they need China’s huge market, and on the other hand, they do not allow China to have a large trade surplus. On the one hand, they need to be made in China, and on the other hand, they will not allow China to surpass them with science and technology. On the one hand, they criticized China’s human rights, on the other hand, they shielded themselves from slaughtering children and civilians in the Middle East. On the one hand, they hyped up China’s environmental pollution, on the other hand, they acquiesced in Japan’s discharge of nuclear sewage. On the one hand, they slandered China’s tree planting and afforestation will bring harm to the environment, on the other hand, they turned a deaf ear to the Australian forest fires. ……

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x