Chinese dissident Miles Guo continues to reveal the collusions between the Chinese high-tech companies and the Chinese Communist Party during his live stream on Sunday with the friends of the Whistleblower Movement in New Zealand on G-TV (https://gtv.org).
According to Miles Guo, all Chinese high-tech companies have been weaponized by the CCP as part of the unrestricted warfare.
For example, Alibaba’s founder Ma Yun (Jack Ma) has been deeply involved in the CCP’s global expansion and espionage campaign.
After the fallout of Sun Lijun, a CCP’s spymaster, Ma Yun has confessed to the CCP about his collusion with Sun. Ma is the key person for money laundering activities.
There are “three treasures” in Alibaba:
- Ali-Pay, a third-party mobile & online payment platform, is the CCP’s top money-laundering platform
- Alibaba’s Ant Financial Services Group, the world’s highest-valued FinTech company with a valuation of US$150 billion, is a tool for corrupting anyone anywhere in the world.
- Alibaba Cloud, a Chinese cloud computing company, is for intelligence gathering around the world.
Chinese high-tech companies’ ties to CCP were also caught red-handed by Chinese netizens in these photos for ByteDance, Tencent, Alibaba, Weibo, JD, & Speedy. Their employees were seen posing with the Communist Party’s flag during company-hosted functions and meetings.
From CCP media:
US President Donald Trump issued an executive order on Friday giving ByteDance, the Chinese parent company of TikTok, 90 days to sell the popular video-sharing app.
The latest order comes a week after the president signed two orders, which will take effect on Sept 20, prohibiting US companies and individuals from conducting transactions with TikTok and WeChat, over national security concerns.
In the new order, Trump cited the same rationale as before, saying, “There is credible evidence that leads me to believe that ByteDance… might take action that threatens to impair” US national security.
The order also requires ByteDance to destroy all data of American users collected on TikTok’s platform and inform the interagency Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States when it has destroyed all such data.
Microsoft, the leading bidder to acquire TikTok’s US operations, has said negotiations with ByteDance could be completed by Sept 15, ahead of the previous deadline.
Melissa Hathaway, an expert in cyberspace policy and cybersecurity, said: “Executive orders could be superseded by another executive order that changes or softens the policy. The thing that’s important to watch is which of the agencies are given the authority to take action.”
For these orders, the power and authority exist in the Department of Commerce, she said, but it’s not clear how the government is going to execute the orders, for example by requiring US app stores to remove TikTok and WeChat.
TikTok intends to challenge the legality of Trump’s orders through a lawsuit, according to NPR, which cited an unnamed lawyer working for the company.
Another lawyer, Mike Godwin, said in a tweet that he was representing a TikTok employee to sue the Trump administration, on the grounds that under the initial order, TikTok employees would lose their paychecks on Sept 20, and he said this would violate the employees’ constitutional rights.
The Trump administration has been scrutinizing TikTok for months, alleging that the platform shares the data of US users with the Chinese government, despite the company’s repeated denial of such accusations.
The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, which reviews mergers for national security threats, opened an investigation in November into ByteDance’s takeover of short-video app Musical.ly in 2017. The acquisition led to the current version of TikTok.
Experts in cybersecurity said the administration lacks transparency and the evidence to back its claims.
Hathaway said the White House is currently defining national security issues very broadly, and that might reflect “a tech fear and a future fear “beyond the current issue itself.
Gary Rieschel, a US venture capitalist who founded Qiming Venture Partners in Shanghai, said, “I look at TikTok again, (and) there’s no real history of turning data over to the Chinese government”. He added that he believed the real issue behind the national security rhetoric lies with technology leadership.
Rieschel said there’s nothing in TikTok’s ownership structure to cause concerns, since most of the investment in ByteDance and TikTok comes from international funds, with firms like Sequoia Capital, Hillhouse Capital Group and SIG as primary investors.
“Those are the primary investors, and the vast majority of the cash for those investors has come from US endowments foundations and pensions,” he added. “You don’t really see any Chinese government entities in the ownership structure.”
What’s partly driving the reaction of the Trump administration, Rieschel said, is the fact that it’s the first time a foreign company is becoming so successful and wildly popular among adolescents. “I think it makes people nervous when you see something get that big, that valuable, that fast,” he said.
Hathaway said the current conversation around TikTok should be much more transparent－not just about the US and China, but about the apps broadly.
“The conversation needs to be about the data, not about the app or the company, because that’s what it’s really coming down to－the data flows, the access to that information and what you can do with it,” she said.
“Facebook hasn’t had a very good record of protecting our data and/or following their own policies on privacy,” Hathaway added. “So you could look at the same challenges in the United States of our companies. Many have had the same concerns of the datasets that they have access to.”
Steve Orlins, president of the National Committee on US-China Relations, said the current issues with TikTok and WeChat indicate the Trump administration’s lack of expertise on China.
“I actually don’t agree with that assumption that the Chinese companies would not resist the request of the Chinese government (to send data back to China),” Orlins said at a recent webinar hosted by his organization.
Whether big companies like Alibaba or smaller companies conduct business in the US, “once they took that data and transferred it back to China, their existence outside of China is over,” he said.
“So the whole analysis by our government that this just would happen arbitrarily and capriciously is wrong. It’s not how the Chinese system works,” said Orlins.
Washington guilty of stickups in its targeting Chinese high-tech: China Daily editorial
Washington’s attempt to purge the United States of Chinese high-tech companies continues apace, with US President Donald Trump saying on Saturday during a news conference that he was “looking into” whether Chinese technology giant Alibaba should be banned in the US.
That possibility comes hard on the heels of his executive order on Friday that ByteDance, the owner of short-video sharing app TikTok, divest its US operations within 90 days, on the grounds that there was “credible evidence” TikTok might “impair the national security of the United States” — although, as ever, none was forthcoming to support this allegation.
The latest executive order came a week after his executive order banning US companies from conducting business transactions with ByteDance within 45 days. A separate executive order bans any transaction that is related to WeChat, the most-used messaging system in the world that is owned by the Chinese company Tencent.
Given the pace of the current negotiations between ByteDance and Microsoft, insiders say it is impossible to finish the transaction and “destroy all the data” tied to US users within 90 days.
The latest order concerning TikTok and the admission that the administration is casing the joint of other successful Chinese tech companies are just further evidence that the US administration despite its claims to be cleansing the US of security threats is simply committed to breaking and entering Chinese tech companies.
With a number of Chinese tech companies having developed into world-class players comparable to their US counterparts, the US administration is clearly intent on mugging them as part of its stand-and-deliver “America first” agenda.
What the US administration wants is by no means a “clean internet” but an internet that has only US genes. Its self-proclaimed efforts to safeguard data security are only blasting points for it to get into the virtual vaults of these Chinese companies and so extend the US hegemony in cyberspace.
Its claim to be protecting privacy and the individual liberties of citizens is nothing but a high-sounding pretext to cover up its shadowy online presence and the online transgressions of US corporations and government agencies.
Beijing will never sit with folded arms while Washington ransacks its corporations. Although it is not Beijing’s intention to escalate the tensions, Washington will reap what it sows if it continues with its heists and holdups of successful Chinese enterprises.