<<< Listen to the podcast >>>

The truth about Adani on Q&A

It’s almost like this bloke listens to the Daily Breakdown.

Good man!

And isn’t it great that when people talk about “bipartisanship” they really mean “do what I want and agree with me!”

They’re protesting against Trump in the UK

Actors are idiots.

Did they protest against Xi Jinping in 2015?

Nope. Idiots and hypocrites. Rack off. If we knew who you were, we’d care more. Maybe.

Oh. You were on a soap. Coronation Street. Yep, keep buggering off.

ScoMo talks softly but carries a big cheque book

Make no mistake, ScoMo in the Solomons is all about containing China:

Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison will visit the Solomon Islands next week, two sources familiar with the plans said on Monday, as Western nations seek to rein in China’s influence on the tiny Pacific island.

With the United States and its allies keen to ensure China does not increase its foothold in the Pacific, protecting diplomatic recognition for self-ruled Taiwan has emerged as a flashpoint in regional ties.

“China is the Solomon Islands’ largest trading partner and this is adding a lot of pressure on lawmakers to switch allegiances,” said Jonathan Pryke, Pacific Islands program director at the think-tank, the Lowy Institute.

There is some doubt as to whether China wants the South Pacific in debt, but China probably doesn’t care so long as it gets what it wants.

It’s not just the poorer nations. New Zealand is also under threat from Chinese influence:

As China flexes its muscles throughout the Pacific, New Zealand is now finding itself in a troublesome position as the nation awaits a major report into foreign interference expected to come out soon.

Until now, the United States and Australia have fretted over the possibility of China exerting influence through debt and construction in the region, but much less attention seems to have been paid to New Zealand amid increasing reports of espionage by Beijing.

But there are signs of divisions emerging within New Zealand’s coalition government over how to respond to claims of undue influence from its largest trading partner.

Have a read.  It’s a worry.

The Black Widow is clearly not good at this

Ok. This isn’t good.

The seven times Kristina Keneally said “clear”:

3.03 – On her changing views on turning back boats – “I’m being quite clear about that.”

4.17 – On offshore processing: “Let me be clear Neil, let me be absolutely clear. As I said in 2015, and I have continue to hold since, offshore processing, turn backs where it’s safe to do so, and regional resettlement are fundamental and absolutely necessary.”

4.56 – On resettlement of asylum seekers in a third country – “People should be resettled in third countries. Let’s be clear about this.”

5.27 – On resettlement of asylum seekers in a third country – “Neil, let’s be clear. The government could have taken up an offer from New Zealand to resettle 150 refugees, they refused to do that.”

10.53 – On taking responsibility for the children of Australian terrorists – “Let’s make it clear. Since the election occurred, since that legislation was first tabled, we have had people like Mike Pompeo and others saying that countries need to consider their responsibility to these foreign fighters.”

13.16 – On US leadership – “Let me be clear that I respect the office of the president of the United States.”

China dismisses Tiananmen Square anniversary

This is from the nationalist Global Times:

June 4 immunized China against turmoil

June 4 marks the 30th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square incident. The Communist Party of China and the Chinese government have determined the nature of the incident. Chinese society has also made a comprehensive summary of it. Dropping the incident thereafter has been aimed at helping the country leave the shadow behind, avoid disputes, and help all Chinese people face the future.

We consider such practice a political success, although some people have criticized it from the perspective of news governance. Merely afflicting China once, the incident has not become a long-term nightmare for the country. Neither has the incident’s anniversary ever been placed in the teeth of the storm. It has become a faded historical event, rather than an actual entanglement.

The Chinese government’s control of the incident in 1989 has been a watershed marking the differences between China and former Eastern European socialist countries, including the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia. Since the incident, China has successfully become the world’s second largest economy, with rapid improvement of people’s living standards. The policy of avoiding arguing has served as a contributor to the country’s economic take-off.

Today’s China obviously has no political conditions to suddenly reproduce the riot of 30 years ago. Chinese society, including its intellectual elite, is now far more mature than it was in 1989. In those years, China’s reform was carried out prior to those of the Soviet Union and Eastern European countries. China was completely inexperienced, with an intellectual circle filled with idealism. Chinese society today has seen enough of the political tragedies that occurred in the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia and some Arab countries.

Having become politically mature, we now understand the significance of the country’s continuous development through evolutions instead of revolutions. We are also aware of the difficulties and complexity at the practical level.

As a vaccination for the Chinese society, the Tiananmen incident will greatly increase China’s immunity against any major political turmoil in the future.

We have noticed that every year around June 4, certain forces outside the Chinese mainland stir up public opinion and attack China. Such forces consist of two groups of people: student leaders and dissidents who fled abroad after 1989, and Western politicians and media outlets.

The first group’s understanding of the incident remains fixed in 1989. They refuse to correct their understanding of China’s development and the changes that the world has been through. Their interests have been decoupled from the Chinese people and have merged with anti-China forces outside China. Their attitude toward the incident cannot represent those of today’s Chinese public.

Western politicians’ discussions of the incident are mainly influenced by their countries’ relations with China. Due to the deterioration of China-US ties, US officials have launched fierce attacks against China that have focused on the incident since last year. But Chinese people are clear that those officials are not genuinely concerned about Chinese human rights, but are making use of the incident as a diplomatic tool to challenge China.

However, all these noises will have no real impact on Chinese society. The actions of the external forces are completely in vain.