Below is a Xinhuanet link to a speech by Xi and then some quotes from it
Keynote speech by Chinese President Xi Jinping at APEC CEO Dialogues
The quotes
”
Since the start of this year, facing the sudden onslaught of COVID-19, China has put people and life above everything else. The 1.4 billion Chinese people, united as one, have made a major strategic achievement in fighting the virus. We have endeavored to both contain the virus and speedily bring production and life back to normal, thus maintaining economic and social development. China’s economy resumed positive overall growth in the first three quarters this year. This hard-won achievement speaks volumes about the resilience and vitality of the Chinese economy. The fundamentals sustaining China’s steady and long-term economic growth remain unchanged. We have full confidence and ability to maintain stable economic performance and achieve the goals of finishing the building of a moderately prosperous society in all respects and eradicating poverty within the set time frame.
At its recently concluded Fifth Plenary Session of the 19th Central Committee, the Communist Party of China deliberated on and adopted the recommendations for formulating China’s 14th Five-Year Plan. According to the recommendations, China will complete building a moderately prosperous society in all respects within the set time frame. From next year on, China will embark on a new journey toward fully building a modern socialist country. We will develop a full understanding of the new development stage, and apply the new development philosophy. We will foster a new development paradigm with domestic circulation as the mainstay and domestic and international circulations reinforcing each other. The new development paradigm is a strategic decision we have made based on the current stage and conditions of development in China and with full consideration given to economic globalization and changes in the external environment.
….
Openness enables a country to move forward, while seclusion holds it back. In today’s world where economic globalization has become an irreversible trend, no country can develop itself by keeping its doors closed. China is already deeply integrated into the global economy and the international system. We will not reverse course or run against historical trend by “decoupling” or forming a small circle to keep others out. By fostering a new development paradigm, we are not pursuing a closed-door circulation, but open and mutually reinforcing domestic and international circulations.
”

Posted by: psychohistorian | Nov 20 2020 5:24 utc | 103

This is what KKKult leader Trump reduces bootlickers to:
giuliani-hair-dye-press-conference
He had dye coming out of his ears coming out of his, you know…
Trump is a menace to society, to democracy and to humanity.
Hospitals are going to be so overwhelmed with Covid patients they’re going to start letting the older ones just die, like in Italy, and I believe some are already doing that. Meanwhile Trump the depraved, indifferent criminal is digging his heels into the floor of the Oval Office, refusing to let go of power, sending his crazy lawyer to peddle his election fraud conspiracy to any judge who will listen. After the hair dye spectacle, the next judge he encounters should immediately state: Throw this demented quack and his case out of my courtroom and fine him for bringing a frivolous case and attempting to waste the Court’s time!
This charade has gone on long enough; evict the Oval Office s.o.b. squatter nowwwww!

Posted by: Circe | Nov 20 2020 6:19 utc | 105

@ Featherless | Nov 20 2020 6:02 utc | 103

But ugh. She threw Venezuela and Cuba under the bus, as associated to those dominion machines and their software. Didn’t mention Canada or Spain or Germany though.

Yes, I reacted to that as well. It seems like an excellent way to let the air out of the case. Which team is she on?

Posted by: Norwegian | Nov 20 2020 8:29 utc | 107

“Britain has announced an extra £24.1 billion ($31.8 billion) in military spending, as part of the country’s biggest investment in defence since the cold war that ended 30 years ago in 1991.”
always more for war

Posted by: arby | Nov 20 2020 13:05 utc | 109

Here is Slate equating present divisiveness in the US with France in the Huguenot persecution era: source
Overall, wrong.
The author does mention regional rivalries in a single sentence, but categorizes the conflict as mostly religious.
Equally, the author describes the differing viewpoints in the US as between almost balanced groups. I consider this wrong as well; I see the present situation as a function of class: PMCs with the full power of society and the state vs. everyone else.
The difference?
A regional conflict at its worst yields civil war.
A class conflict at its worst yields revolution.
The one question I have been pondering is: Normally, the ruling class has its Praetorian Guards or some other form of kinetic defense.
Is this true for the PMCs today?
I do not believe the military or law enforcement rank and file share the PMCs views and goals. Are their economic interests sufficiently intertwined for them to overcome their class conflicts with the PMCs?

Posted by: c1ue | Nov 20 2020 13:52 utc | 111

@Posted by: Featherless | Nov 20 2020 6:02 utc | 104, Norwegian | Nov 20 2020 8:29 utc | 107
Part of what S. Powell was saying about VZ-Dominion[Sequoia] black box voting connections was quoting from a 2006 letter by Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D. NY) to some US voting/election authority, voicing Maloney’s concerns about the security/hazards of that company’s e-voting equipment.
Part of it may be as Featherless suggested: Powell genuflecting and paying lip-service to the current official US foreign policy propaganda narrative line vis a vis Venezuela and Cuba.
She also said something interesting when a reporter asked her a question about the alleged US forces seizing purported vote processing servers in the Munich office of the company SCYTL (Sp?) reported a few days ago.
Sidney said her understanding was yes it had occurred, but then added the curious comment that she was not sure if “the good guys got it or the bad guys got it”.
Meaning maybe the raid was carried out by US elements (corrupt 3-letter agencies?) intending to suppress/destroy evidence stored on those servers?

Posted by: gm | Nov 20 2020 13:55 utc | 113

@steven t johnson #99
I didn’t believe your credibility could get any worse, but you have accomplished it.
Calling pretzelattack a Trump shill is so wrong as to have had me laughing for a good 2 minutes.
You really have no idea what you are doing or saying – just a reflex to call anyone who doesn’t agree with you, names.
Thank you for providing levity with your absolutely breathtaking incompetence.

Posted by: c1ue | Nov 20 2020 14:18 utc | 115

Giuliani and Powell are both serious lawyers and Giuliani is a fairly significant public figure. I find it highly unlikely that either of them would be willing to totally destroy their public reputations and put themselves at risk of lawsuits by filing a completely baseless legal case and making such shocking accusations without at least some supporting evidence (perhaps not enough to win the case, but enough that the cases need to be taken seriously and not laughed out of court). The Duran did a video on this press conference and they seem to think that the Trump campaign is setting this up to be a long term legal battle that will dog Biden/Harris/DNC well into the new year and possibly destroy the creditability of any Biden/Harris administration even if the election results aren’t thrown out. However, I should also point out this whole argument could easily be grabbed onto by the RNC in general as a weapon to beat the DNC over the head with as a payback for Russiagate. Interestingly, we should remember that Trump came to power promising better relations with Russia and Russiagate was used to push him to confront and sanction Russia over and over again. Now Powell and Giuliani accused Venezuela, Cuba & England of in effect trying to manipulate a US election will this be used to push a possible Biden/Harris administration to escalation against Venezuela & Cuba

Posted by: Kadath | Nov 20 2020 15:56 utc | 117

RE: Posted by: gm | Nov 20 2020 13:55 utc | 113
Correction: SCYTL Office raided was in Frankfort (not Munich) according to reports.

Posted by: gm | Nov 20 2020 16:07 utc | 119

c1ue@115 still can’t quote anything I wrote that shills for Biden or anyone else, but I’ve quoted pretzelattack lying about how Trump wasn’t, unlike the Democrats, bankrupting the country with military spending. Lying for Trump to attack Democrats is Trump shilling. Case closed, pretzelattack and c1ue lost.

Posted by: steven t johnson | Nov 20 2020 16:51 utc | 121

@120 c1ue
It is true that you must study your enemy and this means sometimes cloaking yourself or lurking in their midst to try and discover patterns of thought that permeate their warped worldviews.
I disagree that these sites do not cause harm, however, and that a subjective relativism should abound when dealing with worldviews.
Indeed, their mission at slate is not one of understanding, of reaching out. It is purely a technological powerhouse meant to bully.
Why do slick sights like slate, which offers little in meaty intellectual discourse when compared to no-frills sites like MoA or Unz, draw so many to its readership? Because flashy lights and high-production values are a tool for clouding minds: those that partake in wide-eyed amazement at the production believe that this equates to truth when it comes to worldview.
Look at the spectacle of modern films. It is the same phenomenon. Talk about dazzling with bullshit.
Make no mistake though. The fake display of neocon/neoliberalism playing off each other at slate represents something far more sinister than something to be tacitly condoned. It smells of the future.

Posted by: NemesisCalling | Nov 20 2020 17:17 utc | 123

@NemesisCalling #123
Harm is your view; my view is that truth gets discovered in the interplay between viewpoints.
Sometimes this interplay is harmonic, more often it is adversarial. The value of free speech is precisely to encourage this interplay.
The harms of Slate and other MSM isn’t what those outlets say – it is what is not permitted to be said by anyone else.

Posted by: c1ue | Nov 20 2020 21:06 utc | 125

I haven’t had time to read all the posts so perhaps someone has already replied?
@ Posted by: oldhippie | Nov 19 2020 13:16 utc | 50
If you look more carefully, you’ll see that the claim made by Kerstin Skovgaard et al is not what you represent. They are making a far narrower claim.
Further, the circumstances of the study make even that claim questionable.
They claim masks did not protect the ~6,000 wearers from covid infection (as fifty some from one group and sixty some from the other were infected).
They did not claim that masks don’t prevent the spread of covid to others. They did not even look at this.
Second, the study is based on self reporting data. IOW it is not a scientific study in a rigorous sense. Further,the prevalence of possible disease exposure was low and variable.
So not rigorous science. Only good for feeding covid hysteria.

Posted by: suzan | Nov 21 2020 2:40 utc | 127

Trump’s legal team has multiple complaints. Most of these complaints involve isolated incidents and have very narrow implications. Trump’s legal team has amassed witness testimony to some abuses, but it’s unclear if that is extensive enough to call into question the legitimacy of the vote.
The most serious allegation appears to be the claim that Republican observers weren’t allowed to be close enough to verify the authenticity of mail-in-ballots. Once accepted, there is no way to audit the verification of a mail-in ballot.
Powell adds a National Security dimension by raising the issue of ownership and control of voting machines and tabulators.
Trump and his legal team steadfastly ignore the widespread expectation that mail-in votes would be mostly for Biden. Guiliani, for example, says: when I went to bed on election day Trump was up by hundreds of thousands of votes in Pennsylvania. We have seen a similar denial of reality from Trump on other issues (such as, “if we test more, we’ll just find more cases!” – as though the testing will generate cases instead of finding them).
It’s difficult for me to imagine that Republican Legislatures in contested states will override the “will of the people” but few would’ve foreseen a Bush win in 2000 engineered by complaints over “hanging chads”.
<> <> <> <> <>
If Trump does manage to win (with Deep State approval), it is a very bad omen. It would embolden him as much as his tenacity endears him to his supporters. And history shows us that Republicans – the Party most associated with USA patriotism – are much more likely to start major wars.
!!

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 21 2020 3:05 utc | 129

All across the [[[five liars]]] land, whiteys are chanting….
‘We’r all Uighurs now’
I heard the anglos are championing to ban the film MUlan….cuz part of the flim was film in Xinjiang, where ‘CCP put millions of our moslem bro into gulags’, accodring to the [[[five liars]]] bullhorn.
[sic]
Hard to believe, are these the same people who turned Fallujah to shards , the same people who’ve massacred 30M civilians, mostly moslems since ww2 alone?

Posted by: denk | Nov 21 2020 14:17 utc | 131

@NemesisCalling #126
The US and the western democracies don’t, largely, explicitly ban.
Their strategy is the Bullhorn and the kazoo. MSM is the Bullhorn and everyone else has kazoos – the effect is that the majority of the population is too busy/lazy/dumb/ideological/whatever to go through the extra effort to find obscure sites and navigate unslick web interfaces.
China has shown that explicit control of the internet is possible – but that only works via a truly enormous monetary and other overhead cost.
The large social networks are also finding this out.
So my answer to your theoretical question is: if explicit banning occurs, there will be plenty of signs of that before it really gets going. This would include intel agencies or some other government agency hiring literally hundreds of thousands of people for this work.
The shadowbanning type stuff that we see today is actually more of an artifact than a goal: these companies were forced to create mechanisms to control porn, ponzi schemes and what not – and this mechanism was then hijacked by Cancel types to promote their ideological agenda.
The problem is that there is no right answer for a social media company with the cancel types, so it isn’t going to progress much further.

Posted by: c1ue | Nov 21 2020 18:31 utc | 133

@ Suzan & c1ue
As a thought experiment attempt to devise a study that will address all your concerns. Rigorously. For starters all study participants should wear cameras 24/7 so we can monitor compliance. The researchers should view all of that video or we can’t be sure.
What happened was a good faith effort to answer an important question. Since the result is unwelcome the study is being picked to bits. The claims of the study are not just narrow, in the very text of the study the study is attacked by editorial committee.
So what is “the science”? Apparently whatever you wish it to be. Masks are built to standards and they meet those standards. There is no mask that filters virus. Never been attempted. We do not know how much this particular virus is transmitted by droplets and how much transmission is aerosol. We are whistling in the dark. The Danish study tried to shine a little light and no one will have it. Absolutely guaranteeing no further study will be done. Those who were born with a priori knowledge on all subjects have been validated and will rule.

Posted by: oldhippie | Nov 21 2020 18:46 utc | 135

@oldhippie #135
Actually, it is well documented that novel coronavirus primarily transmits via droplets.
We know this because there are almost zero cases of fomite transmission – catching it from a surface.
We also know that the majority of transmission occurs in close and long duration proximity situations: in people’s houses/apartments, nursing homes, barracks etc. Even a cruise ship cabin situation isn’t that bad – considering the people are otherwise much closer in proximity than normal life – particularly during eating.
In any case, the point is still the same: the masks represent very little cost or post opportunity cost. Even if they do nothing – but which we won’t find out until later – they are still worth wearing now.
By all means, do the studies but it is foolish to predicate against mask wearing now.

Posted by: c1ue | Nov 21 2020 18:57 utc | 137

“- they are still worth wearing now”
Nope. Surgical masks are pretty much useless, you’re being had.
Cowling et al. -2009
Simmerman et al. -2010
Canini et al. -2010
Aiello et al. -2020
Leung et al. -2020
and on and on and on …..

Posted by: Hmpf | Nov 21 2020 19:24 utc | 139

c1ue @ 137
No, we do not know that transmission by droplet predominates. Tell me how that might be known experimentally. We know that droplets are much mentioned. I would not like to be in the way of a sneeze just now. I am not encouraging anyone to stand in front of someone who sprays as they speak. The long duration proximity you mention is exactly the case where aerosol buildup would happen. But we just don’t know. Pretending we know what we do not is never helpful.
There are plenty of situations where my face will be masked. Starting with where it is required. For a very extended period public transportation around here did not require masks and I wore one anyway. Masking while out riding my bike – not a chance. While driving my car – not a chance. At home, no thank you. And may we please quit the rubbish about no harm. It absolutely harms children to not see faces, to not play. Dentists are seeing plenty of cases of infection and inflammation with those who must be masked for long shifts. Plenty of other problems. This is a huge experiment on a vast scale and to say it is nothing and all perfectly safe is baseless.
It is not good manners to pull out the heavy guns on social media. Going to do it anyway. I lost a close friend to suicide. He was already somewhat socially isolated, a bit of a loner. Last time we saw him alive he talked a lot about wanting, needing to see faces. RIP Marco.

Posted by: oldhippie | Nov 21 2020 22:11 utc | 141

15 Asia Pac countries have signed on the RCEP deal.
Its only logical that India choose to exclude itself, its the Washington anointed ‘natural leader of Indo Pac’.
It doesnt belong !
But what the fuck is Oz doing in RCEP ?
Caitlin JOhnston

fukus has no friends, only hostages

MInd you,
Oz is that proverbial slave who’s even haughtier than the master.
hehehhehe

Posted by: denk | Nov 22 2020 3:38 utc | 143

A dutch MSM journalist broke in into an ultra secured and secret European Union defense ministers videoconference.He found the supposedly secret acces code on a message from the dutch ministry of Defense.His arrival caused a lot of giggling by the virtual attendants,a lot of those ministers being females.The EU foreignaffairs minister Joseph Borrell immediately threatened the journo with police intervention,and the guy was not in to reporting anything,he just said he was going to leave it there.The videoconvention was annulated because of this security threat.(Imagine the russians listening in as well!).Not even his own media reported about it.
I wonder what was the purpose of this completely underreported deliberation.Maybe they were implementing Pompeo’s directives?Anyways,the E3 have been posing preposterous demands already to Iran for renegociating the JCPOA,accusing Iran of illegally mounting up their stockpile of uranium.
https://fr.sputniknews.com/europe/202011211044807568-un-journaliste-neerlandais-pirate-une-visioconference-des-ministres-de-la-defense-de-lue–video
EU is a joke,but a dictator’s one…

Posted by: willie | Nov 22 2020 8:33 utc | 145

c1ue thank you !
It’s nice to have a knowledgeable community, to learn from.

Posted by: Featherless | Nov 22 2020 8:52 utc | 147

kiwiklown 146
From the Korean war to Nam, Cambodia, Laos..
ex Yugo, Iraq, Afpak, Syria right to the current genocide in Yemen, the ‘west’ war crimes are legendary and well documented
for example, the collected reports from their own
MSM on the atrocities in Fallujah is enough to send
the Bush, Clinton, Blair, Howard to the gallow…
Except, who’s gonna arrest these criminals ?
So we’ve this sickening situation today where these same mofo are holding court on the world stage, anoiting themselves the role of judge, prosecutor and excecutioner all in one.
Planting ‘evidence’ to frame the innocent is par for the course for [[[five liars]]].
Exhibit A
The 1965 genocide on the ethnic Chinese in Indonesia was a joint op by MI5/CIA, the former fabricated fake news about impending coup staged from Beijing, the latter planted ‘evidence’ in the form of ‘China supplied arms cache’.
Almost three millions were slaughtered in that genocide of the century.
This Wuhan caper is but the latest and prolly their
vilest FF to frame the Chinese.
We’r just talking about some biggies here, the tip
of an iceberg..
Its the classic ‘bandits crying robbery’.

Posted by: denk | Nov 22 2020 13:09 utc | 149

@oldhippie #150
So your assertion is that distance doesn’t matter?
Wow, that’s utterly unsupported by anything I’ve seen.
Droplet distance is well tested; aerosol distance is clearly much greater.
If aerosol dispersal was a thing – then the superspreader events that are well documented would all have been worse. I looked at cruise ships, choirs, customer service offices, etc etc.
In every single case, there is no evidence of aerosol transmission.
For a cruise ship – aerosol transmission would mean infections occurred randomly all over the ship. They did not – they were confined to specific corridors and ship’s crew areas.
For the choirs – the people in the audience further back than the first 3 rows basically didn’t get it.
For the offices – only part of the floor where the infections occurred, saw most of the infections. Not the floors above or below.
Perhaps the problem is that you conflate partial benefit vs. prevention. I have never said masks prevent anything. What I’ve said is that they likely reduce the rate of transmission – and even a small reduction or no reduction is more than sufficient reason to have people wear masks since the cost and harms associated are minimal.
As for the Danish study: the calculation is very simple.
Denmark has seen 12000 or so cases per 1 million, according to Worldmeter. The epidemic started in March – until today it is roughly 24 weeks.
The study was April through June = 12 weeks.
12000 cases per 1 million = 12 cases per 1000. Study size was 1500 per cohort – 1 for masks and 1 for no-masks.
The math is therefore 12*1.5*12/34=6.35 which I rounded down to 6.
If masks provide a 10% benefit – this would not be seen in such a study. It would be necessary to have at least 10 infected in a single cohort to have a chance of seeing it – and more like 100 as randomness and chaotic factors do exist.

Posted by: c1ue | Nov 22 2020 17:50 utc | 151