If you need proof that America’s leaders are not American at all, news of China being allowed to purchase hundreds of thousands of acres of farmland near U’S bases across the country, from North Carolina to California.
The report came from the NY Post, which also published a map showing all the states the Chinese have invaded with the complicity of seditionists within our own government, at the local, state, and federal levels.
Chinese entities own farmland near 19 United States military bases across the nation, according to a recent report from the New York Post.
The news outlet released a map showing the locations of the China-owned land in the U.S. and their proximity to some of the nation’s most strategically important bases. The Post noted that some of the sites include Fort Liberty in Fayetteville, North Carolina; Fort Cavazos in Killeen, Texas; Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton in San Diego, California; and MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa, Florida.
‘The Chinese are, or will, use this farmland to learn more about US military capabilities, movements, and technology.’
Robert S. Spalding III, a retired U.S. Air Force brigadier general, told the Post that the lands’ “proximity to strategic locations” is “concerning.”
The South American nation of Peru is allowing China to build a massive new port in its country that creates a significant security risk to the United States of America. The $3.5 billion port will be built in Chancay, Peru by China’s state-owned shipping giant, Cosco Shipping. The port is scheduled to be complete by the end of this year, 2024.
A $3.5 billion deep-water port in Chancay, Peru, primarily owned by China’s state-owned Cosco Shipping and part of China’s Belt and Road Initiative, is expected to be completed by the end of 2024. The port will facilitate direct shipping routes between South America and Asia, significantly reducing transit times for commodities like soy, corn and copper to China.
The U.S. is worried the port’s ability to handle megaships directly between Peru and China could shift trade dynamics, making it easier for China to extract and control South American resources. The U.S. is also concerned about China’s growing economic leverage in the region.
There are also fears the port could be used for military purposes. General Laura Richardson of the U.S. Southern Command has highlighted concerns about the dual-use nature of such infrastructure, where commercial ports could potentially serve military functions. This includes worries about data security and the control over cargo scanning and logistics.
The Chancay port is expected to transform Peru into a strategic commercial hub, facilitating the export of commodities not only from Peru but also from other South American countries like Brazil. This development is seen as a significant step in China’s strategy to deepen its economic ties with Latin America, which has become a new battleground for resources among global powers.
Peruvian officials have downplayed U.S. concerns, suggesting that if the U.S. is worried about China’s growing presence, it should increase its own investments in the region. This stance reflects a broader trend in Latin America, where countries are increasingly looking to China for financing and development projects due to a significant gap in infrastructure funding.
The state of Indiana has passed a bill to end the sale of land to the CCP, the Chinese Communist Party, a bill that was passed and signed after a CCP-connected company was caught trying to buy land. The company that was identified was Fufeng who had just attempted to purchase land in Grand Forks, North Dakota but had to exit the deal after the U.S. Air Force issued a memo referring to the company as a “significant threat to national security.”
The exposure led to more discoveries of CCP purchases of land in Indiana that seems to have resulted from an intentional concentration on the state by the CCP. The network of CCP-connected companies was built under the Indiana Economic Development Corporation, The website openly states it exists to connect Chinese American entrepreneurs with Chinese-owned businesses to come in partnership with one another.
Indiana’s speedy passage of House Bill 1183 in March, prohibiting certain land sales to companies from China and other adversarial countries, has halted a pending real estate deal with the China-owned company Fufeng, according to LaPorte County Assessor records. Fufeng was looking for real estate in Indiana after being booted out of Grand Forks, North Dakota, following a U.S. Air Force memo that called it a “significant threat to national security.”
Fufeng managed to implant itself in North Dakota with a land purchase before being tarred and feathered out of the state. Fortunately, it was legislated out of Indiana — for now.
Fufeng’s short-lived appearance in Indiana was a smoking gun. What else is going on? The Indiana Economic Development Corporation (IEDC), an unelected upgrade to the traditional commerce department, helps select and develop businesses in Indiana. The IEDC has set up many China-owned companies in the state, including 25 currently operational, according to the IEDC general counsel.
The trend of China-based companies in Indiana has not developed organically but through centralized planning with the help of a Chinese Communist Party-linked nonprofit. A contract on the IEDC’s website shows that it has been paying the America China Society of Indiana (ACSI) to facilitate deals with China-owned businesses. The contract outlines IEDC’s interest in “identifying and creating a pipeline of [foreign direct investment] prospects in China” and preparing trip itineraries, among other tasks.
A state contract to fill a requested “pipeline” of China-owned businesses wishing to engage in foreign direct investment, including the purchase of U.S. land, is concerning. The 2017 National Intelligence Law of the People’s Republic of China directs that “any organization or citizen shall support, assist, and cooperate with the state intelligence work” and “state intelligence work institutions shall collect and handle the acts or acts of foreign institutions, organizations, and individuals….”
In other words, China-owned companies operating in the United States are expected to collect intelligence on the United States. Further, most large Chinese companies, especially those allowed to expand into the United States, have CCP members or even party committees within them ensuring loyalty to the CCP’s goals.
Beyond the concerns with Chinese companies taking root in the United States, an organization such as ACSI introduces additional issues when attached to state-level government. ACSI has implemented a series of influence operations and public relations events that may have compromised state decision-making through pressure, gain, or both.
You Will Know Them by Their Fruits
ACSI’s 2018 board of directors paints a picture of the IEDC’s exposure to CCP influence.
A member of the IEDC is on the board, guaranteeing that the IEDC is not only aware of, but actively has influence in, ACSI’s activities.
Westfield Outdoors is one of the China-owned businesses that ACSI brought in as part of the “pipeline.” Westfield Outdoors, along with other China-owned businesses, is one of ACSI’s member sponsors, which in turn influence businesses ACSI recommends to Indiana.
Dr. Zao (Joe) Xu, founder of the Confucius Institute at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, was on the ACSI board until 2018. The U.S. government defunded Confucius Institutes (CI) following expert testimony identifying CI as part of a CCP influence operation. The Confucius Institute at IUPUI closed in 2019 along with nearly all others in the United States.
A board that convenes Indiana government representatives alongside CCP-linked influence operators and oversees a society whose members include China-owned businesses with an intel-gathering mission is a recipe for compromised decision-making.
The Deepening
In 2019, Indiana Governor and IEDC Board Chairman Eric Holcomb took a trip to China likely arranged by ACSI “to renew the Indiana-Zhejiang sister-state relationship” established back in 1987. The Indiana legislature has since banned sister-city agreements with China, so Holcomb had to sign a bill that deeply criticizes the same kind of agreement he celebrated just five years ago.
During that trip, Holcomb visited with the president of the China People’s Association for Friendship with Foreign Countries (CPAFFC), known as the “‘public face’ of the CCP’s United Front Work Department.”
In contrast to ACSI’s description of CPAFFC as “focused on deepening international friendships,” the CPAFFC’s mission in its own words is “to make the foreign serve China.” This stunning whitewashing is readily available on Wikipedia.
Why did Indiana’s governor meet with the leader of the part of the CCP’s influence operation concerned with making other countries serve China? ACSI would have added the CPAFFC stop to the itinerary as part of its role arranging IEDC’s China-bound trips, at the direction of the CCP. It is possible that Holcomb thought he was innocently “deepened” by a nice lady with a panda plate. But from the CPAFFC’s and CCP’s point of view, he declared his subservience.
‘Mask Diplomacy’
During early Covid days, China hoarded masks while companies like MyPillow diverted production to manufacturing masks for donation. Then China decided it was time to share. ACSI worked diligently to ensure Indiana participated in the geopolitical phenomenon later coined “Mask Diplomacy.”
Mask diplomacy, the CCP’s effort to look generous and deflect suspicions that Covid came from the Wuhan Lab, involved distributing small quantities of masks for a photo op. Indiana was among the favored states and countries to receive the honor of free masks, per the July 2020 news story on ACSI’s website.
In reality, this publicity stunt was a favor the CCP called in, likely among those trusted partners who have pledged allegiance to the CCP’s head of foreign submission (the CPAFFC) and could be counted on to promote this effort. With both the general public and the carefully selected recipients, the self-serving “favor” was an investment that would be expected to produce a return.
To the recipients, it was likely a nuisance. In context, 100,000 masks is a very small number. The IEDC reported in 2020 with macabre glee that it took fiduciary charge of spending $49 million on 27 million masks for the state, the smallest order of which was 1 million masks. The Chinese gift came with a very detailed receipt — the only mention of this event on IEDC’s website:
The IEDC likely had little “desire” for such a small quantity of masks, other than to satisfy the CCP’s desire to give masks and take credit. But in doing so, the state of Indiana (through its contractor ACSI) accepted a public gift from the Zhejiang Provincial Government of the CCP with an approximate value of nearly $200,000. What are the odds that the CCP would parlay that “favor” into a return gesture?
Far-Flung Fufeng
These are some of the more interesting elements within a long pattern of CCP-linked business development activities, advertised little if at all by the IEDC. It may also explain why the IEDC accepted the disgraced Fufeng earlier this year after its Department of Defense-directed expulsion from North Dakota.
Will the IEDC cancel its contract with ACSI for a “pipeline” of China-based companies in light of the HB 1183 restrictions? Do other states have similarly low-profile links to the CCP buried deep within unelected departments? The nearly two-thirds of all U.S. states currently advancing anti-China bills similar to HB 1183 may be doing so at odds with influence operations hidden within their own governments.
Vanessa Battaglia is a defense engineer with experience designing software, hardware, and airborne systems for the Army, Navy, Air Force, Space Force, Special Operations Command, and the Federal Aviation Administration.
John Ratcliffe, the former Director of National Intelligence from 2020 to 2021 is warning the federal government about the current state of America’s patent courts, which are allowing foreign nationals to exploit American technology and sabotage American businesses.
The Network Contagion Research Institute (NCRI) is claiming it has evidence that reveals the Chinese Communist Party is funding, in part, the operations that are leading to riots and other disruptions in American universities.
President Joe Biden made it official on May 14, 2024 when the administration announced it would be implementing a new round of tariffs targeting Chinese goods, including electric vehicles. The tariffs affect $18 billion worth of Chinese goods.
Representative Tom Suozzi (D-NY) was caught paying a Chinese Communist Party agent thousands of dollars to place ads in a Chinese-owned newspaper. Suozzi also happens to be on the House committee currently investigating China’s alleged ongoing genocide of the Uyghurs.
After TikTok’s CEO told the American congress he was no communist asset, nor was his company, a court filing by the CCP-owned company proves TikTok is, in fact, nothing but a CCP asset that operates only through CCP approval. In a court filing protesting the passage of a law that would ban the CCP-controlled app, TikTok admitted that due to the Chinese government’s direct control of its company, it couldn’t even legally sell the asset to a non-CCP entity even if they wanted to.
Michael Sobolik, a senior fellow at the American Foreign Policy Council, said of the filing, “For years, TikTok has asserted its legal and operational independence from the Chinese Communist Party. TikTok admitted as much in its federal petition against the law and said what every serious person has known for years: the Chinese Communist Party will not permit a divestment,” he continued. “That’s not a problem for the American people. That’s a problem for TikTok.”
TikTok and its parent company ByteDance filed a lawsuit against the United States on Tuesday claiming it is “unconstitutional” for the government to force the app to be sold by its Chinese owner or be outright banned in the U.S.
In addition to the expected — yet inadequate — arguments as to why TikTok should remain under Chinese ownership and available to American users on First Amendment grounds, the complaint makes a significant admission about how valuable TikTok is to the Chinese Communist Party.
On pages 18 and 19 of the complaint, TikTok’s attorneys argue that the app’s foundational algorithm can’t be passed off to another entity to remain available in the United States…because the Chinese Communist Party won’t allow it (emphasis added):
Third, the Chinese government has made clear that it would not permit a divestment of the recommendation engine that is a key to the success of TikTok in the United States. Like the United States, China regulates the export of certain technologies originating there. China’s export control rules cover “information processing technologies” such as “personal interactive data algorithms.” China’s official news agency has reported that under these rules, any sale of recommendation algorithms developed by engineers employed by ByteDance subsidiaries, including TikTok, would require a government license. China also enacted an additional export control law that “gives the Chinese government new policy tools and justifications to deny and impose terms on foreign commercial transactions.” China adopted these enhanced export control restrictions between August and October 2020, shortly after President Trump’s August 6, 2020 and August 14, 2020 executive orders targeting TikTok. By doing so, the Chinese government clearly signaled that it would assert its export control powers with respect to any attempt to sever TikTok’s operations from ByteDance, and that any severance would leave TikTok without access to the recommendation engine that has created a unique style and community that cannot be replicated on any other platform today.
GM lost $106 million during the first quarter in China, marking only its third quarterly loss in the country in at least 15 years and the largest outside of the coronavirus pandemic during that time.
GM’s fall from grace in the country is staggering amid geopolitical tensions between the U.S. and China, along with changing consumer sentiment and increased domestic competition there.
While the challenges aren’t unique to GM, the company has the most to lose after several restructurings and exits from other markets in a bid to become more profitable.
