Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘Switzerland’

Recent Leaks Expose Communist China’s Extensive Infiltration Of The West


Reported by Helen Raleigh DECEMBER 18, 2020

U.S. State Department’s Assistant Secretary David Stilwell recently warned the public: “Influence and interference operations are fundamental to how the Chinese Communist Party engages with the world.” Through two leaked documents, the rest of the world recently discovered more about how aggressive and extensive the CCP’s influence and interference operations are: a database of CCP members and a secret agreement between Switzerland and Chinese police.

The CCP Member Database

One of the largest newspapers in Australia, The Australian, reported last weekend it obtained a leaked database of nearly two million CCP members, including their national ID number, birth date, and party position. Additionally, the database contains information on almost 80,000 party branches, showing these CCP members are currently working inside international corporations, universities, and even government agencies around the world.

Based on this databaseThe Australian also disclosed the names of several companies that have employed CCP members, including Boeing, Volkswagen, Qualcomm, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Deutsche Bank, and J.P. Morgan. Further, as seen via the database, numerous CCP members have infiltrated Australian, American, and United Kingdom consulates in Shanghai, China.

The database was reportedly extracted from a Shanghai-based server by a Chinese dissident in 2016. The Australian stated it hasn’t found any evidence that any member on the list is spying for the CCP. Still, there are good reasons to be concerned. As one national security expert suggested, “Allowing members of the CCP to work for such companies risks their stealing technology, providing intelligence to China on forthcoming weapons systems and capabilities, or on force structures built around those capabilities.”

That no spying has been discovered yet doesn’t mean it hasn’t happened or it won’t happen in the future when the CCP issues a call to action. After all, these CCP members took the same oath when they first joined the party, to “carry out the Party’s decisions; strictly observe Party discipline; guard Party secrets; be loyal to the Party … fight for communism throughout my life, be ready at all times to sacrifice my all for the Party and the people, and never betray the party.” If the party demands its members to share sensitive technology or take certain actions, it will be very difficult for a CCP member to say no.

Besides security concerns, having this many CCP members holding senior positions at western companies and government agencies also raises the concern that they would influence or sway these entities to support the CCP’s policies. For example, the U.K.’s Telegraph discovered:

…At least 335 HSBC employees were CCP members. Current members include the senior vice-president of HSBC China, the president of HSBC’s Shenzhen office, and the deputy manager of Hong Kong corporate and consumer products are listed as members.

The paper also learned that the deputy president of Standard Chartered Bank in China, Dong Shuyin, has won the “Excellent Communist Party Member in Shanghai” award.

Not surprisingly, both HSBC and the Standard Chartered Bank publicly backed the new national security law that China imposed on Hong Kong to crack down on dissent in the city. The law is so draconian that even a tweet supporting Hong Kong protests could land someone in jail. At least two dozen Hong Kong activists have been imprisoned under the security law since it went into effect in July.

HSBC not only supports the policy but may help with its enforcement. Ted Hui, a former pro-democracy Hong Kong lawmaker who now lives in Denmark, claimed that HSBC froze his and his family’s bank accounts. It’s worth asking: would HSBC carry out Beijing’s economic coercion like this had it hadn’t employed so many CCP members in its senior management?

Switzerland’s Secret Deal with Chinese Police

Another leak came from Safeguard Defenders, a Switzerland-based Human Rights organization. It disclosed last weekend that Switzerland had established a secret Re-admission Agreement with Chinese police since Dec. 8, 2015, and posted details of the deal on its website.

Countries typically establish a “Re-admission Agreement” with each other’s immigration agencies to address illegal immigration issues and make sure illegal immigrants or visa over-stayers will be safely returned to their country-of-origin. What’s unusual about Switzerland’s agreement with China is that the deal allows agents from China’s Ministry of Public Security to have “free access in Switzerland, for unsupervised operations across the country.” Furthermore, Switzerland “agreed to keep the identity of visiting agents secret. Agents are selected by China, and Switzerland has no part in the selection.”

Yet MPS is no ordinary agency in China. It’s in charge of Chinese police, national security, espionage, and intelligence. It’s known for suppressing domestic dissent and has been accused of human rights violations.

In recent years, it has expanded its operations overseas, sending agents around the world to bring Chinese nationals it deems as criminals back to China — part of “a global, concerted, and extralegal repatriation effort known as ‘Operation Fox Hunt.’” According to China’s state media, the operation has been highly successful and about 6,000 “criminals” have returned to China by mid-2019, including 300 Uighur Muslims from 16 different countries.

Nevertheless, the aggressive tactics Chinese agents deploy as well as their vague definition of “criminals” have irked law enforcement agencies in the West. In August, the U.S. Department of Justice charged eight people, including both Chinese nationals and U.S. residents, with conspiring to act as illegal agents of China, in a multi-year campaign of harassment and stalking of Chinese immigrants in the United States, attempting to force them back to China.

In contrast, Switzerland appears neither bothered by the hard-hitting tactics of Chinese agents nor concerned with the fate of those who have been forced to return to China. There’s also apparently little concern over whether they committed crimes, or were persecuted for being critical of the CCP’s policies, and whether they would be safe upon their return to China.

Under the agreement between Switzerland and China, the Swiss government put very little constraints on their Chinese counterpart. Chinese MPS agents have been allowed to go anywhere they want, and “meet” anyone they want in Switzerland without the Swiss government’s supervision.

In 2016, 16 Chinese nationals who resided in Switzerland were forced to return to China as the result of these MPS agents’ visits. So far, the Swiss government refuses to disclose who these people were. Even more outrageous, the Swiss government covered the cost of the extensive travel expenses for these Chinese agents. In essence, “Swiss taxpayers are paying for Chinese police agents to secretly enter Switzerland and conduct unsupervised operations against Chinese people inside their country.”

What’s not surprising, but embarrassing for Switzerland, is that the deal is not reciprocated. By no means do Swiss agents who travel to China enjoy anything near the same kind of unsupervised movement inside China. As such, it isn’t clear why the Swiss government signed such an erroneous agreement to aid the CCP, and what benefits, if any, this deal has brought for Switzerland.

When details of this deal became public, it caused an uproar in both the Swiss public and members of Parliament. Since the deal expired on Dec. 7, Switzerland’s Foreign Affair Committee requested a consultation on any renewal of a similar agreement.

The leaked database of CCP members and a secret agreement between Switzerland and Chinese police reveal that the CCP’s influence and infiltration operations are far-reaching and widespread in a scale and magnitude that was previously unknown. It also shows the CCP’s success in executing its plan is at least partially due to the complacency or even willing cooperation by some short-sighted western corporations and governments.

It’s high time for citizens in Western democracies to demand their corporations and governments stand up for the values and liberties we cherish and resist the CCP’s infiltration, corruption, and economic coercion. The long term survival of free societies is at stake.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:
Helen Raleigh, CFA, is an American entrepreneur, writer, and speaker. She’s a senior contributor at The Federalist. Her writings appear in other national media, including The Wall Street Journal and Fox News. Helen is the author of several books, including “Confucius Never Said” and “Backlash: How Communist China’s Aggression Has Backfired.” Follow her on Parler and Twitter: @HRaleighspeaks.

Many a little makes a mickle; Switzerland – What’s in a handshake? Well worth reading.


  1. Authored by Luke Harrison

Sometimes it’s the little things that are most telling. At first glance this may seem like a trivial story but what lies hidden beneath it could have serious consequences for our children and grandchildren.

In Switzerland it has long been customary for students to shake the hands of their teachers at the beginning and end of the school day. It’s a sign of solidarity and mutual respect between teacher and pupil, one that is thought to encourage the right classroom atmosphere. Justice Minister Simonetta Sommaruga recently felt compelled to further explain that shaking hands was part of Swiss culture and daily life.

  1. And the reason she felt compelled to speak out about the handshake is that two Muslim brothers, aged 14 and 15, who have lived in Switzerland for several years (and thus are familiar with its mores), in the town of Therwil, near Basel, refused to shake the hands of their teacher, a woman, because, they claimed, this would violate Muslim teachings that contact with the opposite sex is allowed only with family members.

    At first the school authorities decided to avoid trouble, and initially granted the boys an exemption from having to shake the hand of any female teacher. But an uproar followed, as Mayor Reto Wolf explained to the BBC: “the community was unhappy with the decision taken by the school. In our culture and in our way of communication a handshake is normal and sends out respect for the other person, and this has to be brought home to the children in school.”

    Therwil’s Educational Department reversed the school’s decision, explaining in a statement on May 25 that the school’s exemption was lifted because “the public interest with respect to equality between men and women and the integration of foreigners significantly outweighs the freedom of religion.” It added that a teacher has the right to demand a handshake. Furthermore, if the students refused to shake hands again “the sanctions called for by law will be applied,” which included a possible fine of up to 5,000 dollars.

    This uproar in Switzerland, where many people were enraged at the original exemption granted to the Muslim boys, did not end after that exemption was itself overturned by the local Educational Department. The Swiss understood quite clearly that this was more than a little quarrel over handshakes; it was a fight over whether the Swiss would be masters in their own house, or whether they would be forced to yield, by the granting of special treatment, to the Islamic view of the proper relations between the sexes. It is one battle – small but to the Swiss significant – between overweening Muslim immigrants and the indigenous Swiss.

    Naturally, once the exemption was withdrawn, all hell broke loose among Muslims in Switzerland. The Islamic Central Council of Switzerland, instead of yielding quietly to the Swiss decision to uphold the handshaking custom, criticized the ruling in hysterical terms, claiming that the enforcement of the handshaking is “totalitarian” (!) because its intent is to “forbid religious people from meeting their obligations to God.”

    That, of course, was never the “intent” of the long-standing handshaking custom, which was a nearly-universal custom in Switzerland, and in schools had to do only with encouraging the right classroom atmosphere of mutual respect between instructor and pupil, of which the handshake was one aspect.

    The Swiss formulation of the problem – weighing competing claims — will be familiar to Americans versed in Constitutional adjudication. In this case “the public interest with respect to equality” of the sexes and the “integration of foreigners” (who are expected to adopt Swiss ways, not force the Swiss to exempt them from some of those ways) were weighed against the “religious obligations to God” of Muslims, and the former interests found to outweigh the latter.

    What this case shows is that even at the smallest and seemingly inconsequential level, Muslims are challenging the laws and customs of the Infidels among whom they have been allowed to settle [i.e., stealth jihad toward sharia dominance]. Each little victory, or defeat, will determine whether Muslims will truly integrate into a Western society or, instead, refashion that society to meet Muslim requirements.
    The handshake has been upheld and, what’s more, a stiff fine now will be imposed on those who continue to refuse to shake hands with a female teacher. This is a heartening sign of non-surrender by the Swiss. But the challenges of the Muslims within Europe to the laws and customs of the indigenes have no logical end and will not stop.

    And the greater the number of Muslims allowed to settle in Europe, the stronger and more frequent their challenges will be. They are attempting not to integrate, but rather to create, for now, a second, parallel society, and eventually, through sheer force of numbers from both migration and by outbreeding the Infidels, to fashion not a parallel society but one society — now dominated by Muslim sharia.

    The Swiss handshaking dispute has received some, but not enough, press attention. Presumably, it’s deemed too inconsequential a matter to bother with. But the Swiss know better. And so should we.
    There’s an old Scottish saying that in one variant reads: “Many a little makes a mickle.” That is, the accumulation of many little things leads to one big thing. That’s what’s happening in Europe today. This was one victory for the side of sanity. There will need to be a great many more.
    This needs circulation far and wide.

Whoa! Switzerland Moves to Ban Muslim Women Wearing Burqas in Public!


waving flagBy Tim Brown September 28, 2016

URL of the original posting site: http://constitution.com/whoa-switzerland-moves-ban-muslim-women-wearing-burqas-public/

shutterstock_317121323-633x450

Well, finally there is some common sense prevailing. Now, understand, I’m all for people having the freedom to wear whatever they wish, but when they harbor the ideology of Islam, which is nothing more than a death cult, then everything else is suspect. Now, the Parliament of Switzerland has decided to ban Muslim women from wearing burkas in public.

The Sun reports, citing the German outlet 20 minuten:

Earlier this year a government committee had voted strongly against the ban, Swiss news service 20 minuten reported.

The ruling will have to undergo further scrutiny and votes before it could be made law.

Members voted in favour of a ruling that “no person shall cover his face in public places and in places or hide in the public domain or the provision of public services (excluding sacred sites).”

Blick am Abend reported that CVP National Councillor Elisabeth Schneider-Schneiter said: “The Burqa is an expression of misogynistic Islamist ideology. This symbol we need to halt.”

The Ticino region of Switzerland had already banned the burka and imposed a 7,000 ($9,828.84) pound fine for violation.

Still, the irony is that the Islamic State imposed its own ban of the burka in the northern city of Iraq, Mosul. They considered the burka to be a security risk. Previously, these same jihadists had imposed the burka on the women of Syria and Iraq, even beating them or killing them for not wearing the burka.

However, Switzerland is not the only country to do this. France also passed a burka ban in 2010.

Islam should not be considered as a religion, even though it is, but rather as a totalitarian ideology that is at war with the Creator and Western civilization.Islam is NOT

Reposted with Permission from Freedom Outpost.

CHART: GUN OWNERSHIP BY STATE – One State Blows All The Others Away!


waving flagJune 19, 2015 By


There are a lot of gun owners in America – and those gun owners own a lot of guns!
statesascountry-guns

Chart Below Reveals How Each of the 50 States Compares to Other Countries on Gun Ownershipcropped-george-washington-regarding-2nd-amandment.jpg

In the United States of America, the 2nd amendment grants us the “inherent and inalienable right to keep and bear arms for our self-defense, from both criminals and tyrants.” No other nation in the world comes even close to the estimated 300 million firearms owed by civilians in the U.S.

While gun ownership figures vary and are typically underreported, you can see the entire state-by-state gun ownership estimate chart right here, and see which foreign nation most closely matches your own state on firearms ownership. This makes it clear why any aggressor would hesitate at our border. They know that in the U.S. there is:

“a rifle behind every blade of grass and poking out of every single door and window.”

Movato Real Estate compiled some interesting data that compared gun ownership in the 50 states with gun ownership in other countries as outlined below:

We started with a research group in Switzerland called Small Arms Survey and its report “Small Arms Survey 2007: Guns and the City.” Among other things, it estimated gun-ownership numbers for 178 countries, including the United States (which it estimates has about 270 million guns).

“We then took the estimate of 88.8 guns per 100 people for the U.S.—which, seven years later, is likely higher—and used it to calculate each state’s estimated gun ownership, based on state populations from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2010 survey. (Of course, gun-ownership density varies throughout the country, but this number gave us a easy way to come up with comparable figures for all 50 states, since actual state-to-state numbers were not available.)

“Once we had the list of state numbers, we compared each one to Small Arms Survey’s list of countries and respective gun-ownership estimates, logging the nearest match.”

The study revealed that:

  • California’s total of 33.08 million guns is closest to China’s 40 million
  • Texas’ total of 22.33 million guns is closest to Germany’s 25 million
  • New York’s total of 17.2 million guns is closest to Pakistan’s 18 million

 

state-to-country-guns-chart-1-470x449

state-to-country-guns-chart-2-470x332

state-to-country-guns-chart-3-470x333

source: thefederalistpapers.org

freedom combo 2

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: