A New Alternative Payment System is Here! W/Carl Zha (Part 6)

All right, hello everybody and welcome to Geopolitical Trends, where truth matters. Excited to be with you once again. I saw you now 3 times, guys, uh, twice on this platform and once on the other platform. So Carl is here, he just want to get a glass of water and he'll be here. So I want to just to take this opportunity quickly here, say hi and see who's here. And welcome everybody. Oaken Peters, keep up the good work. Thank you very much. Willie Holman, Muslim Revert, Cam 35. Phil, good to see you. Phil Timeline Dunkley, as always. Ping Yu, good to see you. YT Speaking the Truth, I like that screen name. So good to see you guys. Uh, uh, Jesus Aguilar, good to see you from LA. Uh, F Liu, good to see you as always. Matt Becky, here you are. And who else is here? Yeah, no, it's— there will be people coming later on. So anyway, very excited, and, uh, I'll wait till Carl gets here and we'll start our conversation. Remember, tomorrow join me for the community conversation, and I am debating, guys, uh, I might end up doing part of the conversation on the other platform because of what I wanted to share with you. So I mean, I can do it on this platform here, but the soft version of it But I like you to know what you need to know because, because I care for you guys. So we'll, we'll see, we'll figure it out. So, uh, anyway, let's wait for Carl till he gets here. And here is Carl, he is right here. Let me— I'm gonna bring in Carl right away. We don't waste time here. So, hey Carl! Hi David, good to see you, man. Hey guys, you don't need me to introduce Carl, you know Carl by now. There is no need. To introduce Carl. Let's just get into it. So, so, Carl, first of all, and I— that's just my nature, Carl— I want to say thank you. I know you could be spending this time with your family, but you know, you and I, we do this monthly conversation. And really, the community asks me usually about third week, is Carl coming? And I said, I will reach out to him in due time. So I always keep it to— and it works out because I will be leaving the country for, for a few weeks, and I wanted to do the chat. So I thank you on behalf of the entire community here. So, all right, Carl, let me get, uh, into our conversation. We're gonna be focusing this on, on a host of issues, guys, just for you to know. And we'll talk about, uh, the decision of the China regarding the payments for oil with Iran and, and, uh, and the Russia, which is the main topic here. But also, I'm gonna have to have your feedback on some other issues pertaining to what just took place in the last few weeks or so. So, so I'm going to start first, I want to start with the visit of the National Security Advisor to China. What do you make out of such a trip? And by the way, I was surprised that he was granted an audience with President Xi. I didn't expect that. So what do you make of the trip itself? Why is he going—

what—

or went to China for?

Well, that, that's my— I think that's on everybody's mind. Why? Yeah, I mean, it's obvious the US policy on China has been failing. He is the first National Security Advisor to visit China in 8 years. In 8 years. And, and, and also keep in mind, even Trump went to China. Biden has not been to China during his entire term. As the president. And right now, I mean, I think there's some in Washington do recognize that, uh, there's some, there's some problem. There's, there's obviously a huge problem in the relationship between China and United States. And the, the idea they, they try to project to the public that, okay, we're trying to work through with it, just like Kamala Harris say, or AOC says Kamala Harris is working ceaselessly for a ceasefire deal. I mean, this is the same thing. They're trying to project to the public like we are actually trying to be reasonable here, we're trying to work with China. But I mean, Confucius says listen to one's words but watch their action. What US has been selling weapons to Taiwan, they have been weaponizing, uh, the South China Sea issues through Philippines, and they're, they're, they're now threatening to sanction China over Chinese trade with Russia. I mean, how do you talk to somebody like that? Uh, the, the, the interesting thing is, in the, in the, in the mainstream media, immediately afterwards, it says Sullivan hailed as a great success the, the, the US curb on Chinese technology. And it says Beijing is— the US expert says Beijing is hurt badly by the chip sanction. Okay, how do you go talk to people when your whole purpose is to hurt them, is to hurt their progress? And I, I think for on the Chinese side, you know why Xi Jinping— I think China is still trying to make the effort. I mean, China is turning every opportunity to meet with American official to, to, uh, stating their stance. You know, Xi Jinping said the world is big enough for all countries to develop and prosper. And, and that's perfectly, perfectly rational and normal discourse. But that's not what U.S. officials believe in right now. They believe in zero-sum competition. Your loss is my gain. That's why we have articles like, ah, this is a— it's a great success, the U.S. curb on technology export. Now we're hurting Beijing badly, which only happened in their dreams, by the way, because, by the way, yeah, Huawei just came out with, uh, AI chip that, that rival Nvidia. Tedious. So what, what, what are they doing? I mean, I— for, for me, I think, uh, people like Blinken, like, uh, like Sullivan, they're just looking busy right now because they could possibly be out of a job in a few months. I mean, like, what— Chinese, Iranian, Russia, they couldn't— I mean, they shouldn't trust anything these guys says or signs because it could be potentially tossed out of the window after the US election. You know, we saw that before with Obama's Iran deal that was tossed out by, by Trump. Uh, you know, what's the point of talking to somebody and spending all this energy to hammer out negotiation, a deal, only for it to be thrown out, uh, in a few months? Yeah, but I think China still sees— uh, try to keep the communication channel open uh, you know, try to state their position, which is like, hey, we don't have to do this. US and China can work together. It doesn't have to be like competition, as you guys say, you know. Why don't we just work together in development? Uh, which just makes the US position even more ridiculous because they're going there to press China to stop trade with Russia, um, which is not going to happen. I mean, this is the Definition of insanity is trying to do the same thing over and over expecting different results. I mean, China understands this. China understands if Russia falls, China is next. So why should China help you to bring down Russia so then you can focus on bringing down China? You know, Chinese leadership is not stupid.

Just doesn't make— yeah, yeah. But here's the thing, Carl, I do, I do have to push back on one thing which I Maybe because I, you know, as a Westerner, I might not have acquired the necessary knowledge of the Chinese culture. You know, I know a little bit, I'm learning more and more, but why would China grant the audience? Why would China be too nice to the Americans or to any Westerners for that matter? This is why I was confused as to why President Xi will grant the audience for Sullivan.

I mean, I, I think it's just an important message because in the, the narrative they built in the Western media is that it's a China that's trying to seek replace United States as a global hegemon. And, and then China is like, no, we just want to do business. I mean, the, the most important task for any Chinese leadership is still the development of their own country to bring prosperity to their, to the Chinese people. They're less concerned with hegemony. I mean, not, not the way that US leadership is obsessed with. Yeah. And they're trying to get their message across. Maybe, maybe it's a fool's errand, but at least, you know, for the global audience who may be listening, who may be tuning in, make them understand that's China's position. You know, China is not out there to, to try to replace US as hegemon or trying to dislodge US. But this is what US is forcing China to do by making it a competition, by making it a, a new Cold War 2.0. Um, I mean, China is just— you can say China is humoring Sullivan, or you can see China is just showing that they always leave the door open for negotiation, like they always do.

Yeah, but, but they did last time when Janet Yellen went over, when Tony Blinken went over. And, and they were, uh, President Xi was kind enough to grant them an audience. You know, you're looking at a, you know, in, in international relations context, the matter, the fact that they are standing near the Chinese president and taking that, that photo up says a lot. But on the other hand, I am thinking as a Westerner, it might be misinterpreted on, on the part of the West as a sign of weakness. I know it is not the case, but, uh, that's just how the thinking here.

I, I think we should get a, a, a, a, the photo of Sullivan shaking hands with Xi Jinping.

Oh, I see that.

From the facial expression of Sullivan, it doesn't look like he's getting what he wants. I mean, like, this is a man who is clearly not in his elements and don't want to be there, uh, uh, whereas Xi Jinping just come across as comfortable and confident. And, and, and I mean, I, I don't think, uh, China is, uh, China— I don't think China is afraid of, you know, to appear weak. This is a difference between China and United States, by the way. US congressmen, US politicians constantly stress that we need to assert our credibility, we need to project our strength, we need to show people we're number one. Like, look, you're number one, you don't need to— people don't people will just know it. If you're strong, people will know. Yeah, if you constantly shout from rooftop, I am number one, I'm the greatest, then people might start asking the question. I mean, that's more a sign of insecurity, if anything. And, and I think a lot of the, a lot of the US-China interaction actually reflects the insecurity of the US elite on the part of how they feel about the status of the global status of US right now. Because they are afraid of losing hegemony. They're afraid of losing the, the number one spot. That's why they're projecting their worst fears onto China. That's what they're doing. Uh, but, but I mean, keep communication open, sure, you know, to talk it out, but it, it's kind of tiresome after a while because the US official just completely— oh, that, that's a photo, that's a photo you just, you just found.

Yeah, right there.

I mean, look Yeah, look at Solomon's face.

Oh my God. Oh, that's embarrassing. Very embarrassing. And speaking of the chip, before I forget, I read somewhere that China now reached about $91 billion regarding the chip industry and so forth. I didn't read it in detail. I'm gonna, I'm gonna be looking at that as I move forward. But I wanted to have your insights onto this visit because I did cover it. I did a live stream for the community here. Because I ask the same question. Why the heck is he going for— what does he intend to achieve? That's the— which is, by the way, the role of a Secretary of State, not the National Security, to begin with. But there is another thing that is tied to this, Carl, and I would like to have your insight on it. And this one has to do with the conversation between Mr. Wanyi and his counterpart from Myanmar. At the same time, it was the opposition meeting in Washington at the invitation of Washington. Is this has to do anything with, with the visit of Sullivan to China?

Um, that— see, the, the Myanmar situation is very murky because there is a multifactional, multi-front civil war going on in Myanmar. And, and the, the position of China on Myanmar is that China wants stability in Myanmar because Myanmar is a, is a Chinese neighbor. And, and, you know, neither side— China, Myanmar— neither, neither one is going away. So, so China have to work with whoever is in power in Myanmar. And, and this happened when Aung San Suu Kyi was in power. It will happen, you know, whoever is in power in Myanmar, because China just wants stability on its border. China— the, the thing, one thing China hates absolutely is instability, because instability and civil war in Myanmar cause refugees to flee across the border and cause destabilizing effect along, uh, along China's southwestern border. So this is why before China pushed for the round of peace talks between the, the Myanmar rebels and the Myanmar government, but that, that peace talk have since broke down, um, and, and And this is where Washington play a role, because one of the key strategy of China's Belt and Road Initiative is to diversify, uh, the supply route of energy to China. Because United States— US Navy constantly say, oh, we're gonna choke off the Straits of Malacca, choke off all the energy, uh, to China from, from Middle East. So what China is trying to do is diversify its energy supply. So, you know, one way is building pipeline through Russia They're trying to build more through Central Asia. Another one is build— they build an oil and gas pipeline through Myanmar to Myanmar's coast. So instead of the ships going through the Strait of Malacca, now they can park, they can unload their oil and gas at the ports of Myanmar and gets piped through the pipeline all across Myanmar to China's southwest Yunnan province. That pipeline has been in existence for several years now, and it just very conveniently, very soon after the pipeline was completed, this, you know, the coup broke out and then the civil war. For Washington, it's an opportunity to stick it to China by creating instability, because, you know, just as China understands it wants stability on its border, Washington wants instability to create trouble for China, to destabilize China's Belt and Road, uh, project, and, and then to disrupt China's diversification of energy supply. So, so this is why— I mean, Washington has supported Myanmar rebels for like decades. This stretched back to, to the Cold War. Uh, they used to, uh, CIA used to run like a drug, uh, smuggling operation, opium, heroin, out of the Golden Triangle on the border of Myanmar and Thailand. And, and they did that through their connection in the Thai military. Um, it's very, it's very shady. And that, that, that, uh, because, you know, that, that's how CIA get their, their funding off the book. You know, they have this off-the-book source of revenue through the drug trade, which is documented in an excellent book called The, uh, Hero— The Politics of Heroin, uh, by Alfred McCoy, uh, which, made, made United States government go after him. He was forced— Alfred McCoy was forced out of the United States. He has to go, uh, take a position Australia, um, and, and, and because he wrote that book. And, and this is, this is what the game that United States always play, um, but I think, you know, that this is kind of, um, China the growth of China, yeah, is— it has a momentum of its own. I mean, all these things that United States, uh, tried to, try to do to stop the Chinese progress, uh, it might have some minor impact, you know, for a couple years, but it makes no difference over long term. I mean, we, we— like, this is what they're trying to do in Ukraine, by the way, you know. They sent the best Ukrainian units to invade Russia, to Kursk. But, you know, again, that's not gonna— that's not gonna impact the, the outcome of the war fundamentally. If they're just sending more men to die and they're just pissing off the Russian— more pissed off Russian more, even more, you know, they're, they're, they're just poking the bear to make the bear angry and not really hurting the bear.

Yeah.

Um, and this is what United States failed strategy to contain China has brought. It's creating all these rings of instability around China's borders. But ultimately, because China's economy continues to grow, it will— the gravitational pull of Chinese economy alone will pull a lot of the countries in the surrounding regions to gravitate toward China. We see that in most of Southeast Asia, you know, with the exception of the Philippines. That's, that's, again, it's a US meddling right there. Yeah. Um, and so I You know, US will keep on playing these Mickey Mouse games, but, uh, you know, it's gonna create minor nuisance for China, but fundamentally it's not gonna alter the game.

Well, I believe that China just issued a warning to Philippines. I just read it 2 days ago that the Foreign Ministry— and I think Mr. Wang Yi is the one who issued the warning for Philippines, you know, sort of get your act together. Before it's too late.

So, so, so, last of the Philippines. So last time we are on the show with Jerry, we talk about Philippines. At that time, the, the tension, the tension was actually dialing down. Yeah, China actually worked out, uh, they, they sat down with the Filipino side, they came to an agreement that they're going to return to the 2014 gentlemen agreement where China will— Chinese Coast Guard will allow Filipino supply ships to bring food, water, whatever to the Philippine— 6 Filipino Marines stationed on Sierra Madre. But Philippines promised not to deliver any more building material. So on July 27th, I think it's July 27th, that's when Filipino Navy, they ran a successful supply mission to Sierra Madre without interference from, from Chinese Coast Guard. So everything looks good, you know, everything looks like things are calming down, returning to normalcy. And on July 28th, United States suddenly opened up, had announcement they're supplying $500 million worth of weapons to the Philippines. And, and right after that, Bongbong Marcos went to public and said, oh, the Chinese side misinterpreted our agreement, you know. So, so basically the deal is off and then the confrontation went up again. So this is a another case where US is trying to do whatever he can to sabotage any prospect for peace because that's not in US interest. And now they're talking about station Typhoon missiles, which is nuclear-capable Typhoon missiles in Philippines. So, so first US brought bunch of, uh, Typhoon missile to Philippines ostensibly for the, the military exercise with Filipinos. But now, and later they say, oh, we'll take the missiles out of the Philippines, it was just for the military exercise. Now they're saying, oh, the Philippines are considering purchasing these missiles from United States. Now we know this is a, this is a bogus game because what's really happened, even it— so, so U.S. will supply those missiles, the Philippine government will pay for it, and those missiles will be up, will be stationed on the Filipino soil operated by US personnel. I mean, let's face it, all this US equipment that they send to Ukraine, like Patriots, like HIMARS, none of them are operated by Ukrainians. They're operated by US personnel. So in the Philippines case, US is putting all this military hardware on the Philippines and making the Philippines— Filipinos pay for it, you know, while they are still controlling all these military assets. So to gain a, uh, you know, a foothold on the front line against China. This is the same thing that happened to Australia, by the way, uh, this whole AUKUS deal. Oh yeah, was that after 30, 40 years Australia will get a nuclear submarine from United States, but meanwhile, meanwhile Australia have to build this, uh, a nuclear submarine base in Western Australia in Perth that, that will allow, uh, nuclear submarine to dock. So what that means is while Australia is waiting 30, 40 years paying billions of dollars for a nuclear submarine that may or may not be— may not— you— US Navy has access now to Australian port. They're making Australia to pay for this, pay for nuclear submarine and pay for the renovation and upkeep of the nuclear submarine base the US Navy will have access to. So, so this is— I mean, it works perfectly in the US interest. You know, we're making all these suckers our vassals to pay for our own military, uh, deployment. But you know, but, but, uh, you know, Australian government, Australian politicians, they're— I don't know. I mean, if there anyone who's dumber than US politicians, I mean, Australian might take that spot. So they actually went for it. What They want to buy the— they want to pay for the privilege of having US military on their soil using Australia as a base to strike China. There's another report they talk about, uh, US is going to use Pine Gap, which is another US base in Australia, to, to, um, for like as a front line, uh, to prepare for a nuclear war with China. I mean, this is crazy, Tom. This is crazy, Tom. They're talking about using Australia as a nuclear launching pad. So in the end, you know, if a Chinese counterattack, it's gonna hit, hit Australia, you know. And so, and Australian politicians just sign up for it. And besides, the Pine Gap, that, that base, nor average Australian cannot go there. It's, it's under US jurisdiction. So I, I read, I read one comment by Australian commenter. He said Well, since we have no access to Pine Gap, you know, if China take out Pine Gap, then we can pretend nothing happened because we don't know what happened over there anyway. So if it got taken out, we still don't know what happened. It has nothing to do with us.

Which is true, Carl. There's a section in Pine Gap that is off-limits to Australians. They don't care whether you have security clearance or not. Because this section is above top secret level. You have to be cleared at that level, but doesn't matter. You cannot be an Australian to get in. Only Americans will have, and those Americans will have to be vetted for that. But you're absolutely correct. So I want to go back to— and speaking of Australia, before I forget, while doing all this, they are running to the main issues of the housing market, which is getting so bad. I was talking last time to Robbie Barwick, uh, from the Citizen Party. I wish Australians can understand a little bit about a different party that can move Australia forward and give them a chance instead of those idiots in Canberra, because decisions about Australia are not made in Australia, they're made in Washington. The same thing for Philippines or Korea or even Japan. I will go as far as that one. So I want to take, uh, we want to shift to the energy because we want to talk about this particular aspect, which is the core of what we're going to be talking about. Now, China, Iran, and Russia agreed on that payment system. So how is that, in your opinion, is gonna now really shift the global energy market? I mean, we all know it works, it makes sense for China when it comes down to supply energy sources, but how is that going to impact the global energy market?

So this is where— this is another result of the brilliant US policy, of course, you know, you— because US sanctioned Russia, US sanctioned Iran, and, and US sanctioned Chinese banks that did business with North Korea. So China, China's like, hmm, well, we still need to have business relationship with Russia and Iran, our main energy suppliers. Supply. But if we're going to use our main, uh, banks, the US might apply more sanction to us. Oh, but wait a minute, wait a minute, we have these— these banks that already got sanctioned by United States for transaction with North Korea. US cannot sanction those banks anymore, so let's use those banks to carry out transaction with Iran and Russia. So we didn't think about it, we didn't think smart enough. So that's what happened. I mean I mean, one of the reasons Sullivan went to Beijing, probably, uh, to utter more threats about, oh, we're gonna expand our financial sanction, or we can expand your chip sanction if you don't comply. But, you know, US— China is not going to listen to all that nonsense. Uh, you know, China will find a way to, uh, to, to maintain a relationship with Russia and Iran. I mean, that's, that's, that's in China's vital national interest. United States, you know, US is just a lawyer country, you know, and they, they lawyer up everything. They just rush out with all these legislations to, to, to, uh, to illegalize this, illegalize that. But you know what, Chinese people can always find a way. Talking about finding, finding a workaround, Chinese people know about finding workaround. There will always be work. There's a will, there's a way. And because China wants to maintain a normal trade relationship with Russia, with Iran, uh, and, and, you know, China needs energy that's coming from Russia. China needs the energy that's coming from Iran. And China has nothing against Iran and Russia. I mean, like, why should they sanction these countries on behalf of the United States? So those relationship will continue, except now instead of conducting that business in US dollars like they did before the sanctions, now they do it in Chinese yuan. And 90% of Russia-China trade are now conducting local currency, like, you know, wow, completely off the dollars. So this is, uh, this is where US policy is accelerating trend, the trend of de-dollarization. And, and, you know, and, and also the, the oil and gas deal with Iran This could be a template for future US energy deals with other oil gas suppliers, you know. And then the next thing we're talking about, we're talking about, you know, the, the, the, the status of petrodollar. You know, that's, that's one of the pillars of the, the US financial hegemony is that anybody, everybody needs a dollar to buy oil. But when, when people start to realize, oh, we don't, maybe we don't need dollars to buy oil That's gonna— that's, that's the beginning of the end of the dollar hegemony. Um, and it's already happening. It's just that the trend is, is slowly ramping up, but, but really accelerated after the, the Russian and Iran sanction.

Well, I am keeping my eyes open for next 2 weeks because that's when, uh, the Federal Reserve is gonna, uh, reduce the interest rate, which is gonna be a hit for the US dollar. I mean We know what's coming. So this is, I think, why China is moving into that direction, even, uh, sort of upgrading its infrastructure. I'm aware of the, uh, I'm aware of the one of the largest, uh, platform that China built. It's this one right here. And, uh, uh, I, I read up on it a little bit, including also their large tankers. Those are the oil tankers that the China— so China sort of, uh And when you think about even the pipelines coming out of Siberia, you know, I looked at one. Check this out, Carl. This is all going to China. Look how it's going to China.

Yeah, this is a good map because the power— they already have the Power of Siberia pipeline number one. So that's connecting the gas field in central Siberia to China. Now the Power of Siberia 2 Yeah, he connects the, the, the gas fields and Yamal Peninsula, uh, in the Arctic Circle. And once it's built, you will pipe that gas to China. Now, the, the gas from Yamal Peninsula, originally that was intended to supply Nord Stream 2, and then, and then Nord Stream got blown up. So this is why Russia is speeding up their work on Power Siberia too. So now that all that gas originally intended for Europe will now go to China. And guess what? Once that, that corridor, that gas pipeline has been established, that gas is not going to flow, flow the other way. That it's not, you know what, because once the infrastructure is there, you know, all the trade agreement already hammered out Yeah, that means all this— that means Europe will have to either get their gas elsewhere or they have to pay a premium. And there might not be any gas left for them to supply them because China will have locked up all the gas output from the Yamal Peninsula. So this is a new world, brand new world where we're getting into, you know, the Eurasian bloc, the BRICS. Is coming to form from, from, uh, from a Goldman Sachs acronym to reality. And this is why U.S. is really allergic to anything BRICS or, or anything BRI, you know, they, they really don't like that.

Yeah, well, Euroasia is going to be the center and the hub of it. I, I am preparing a presentation for this particular part of the world for an entity that they, they like want to— the Dr. O, can you talk to us about the Euro-Asia, where the US is going. Well, it's kind of— it's, it's as clear as daylight, except you have to, you know, they know the ins and outs. Because I do see where this change is, uh, change is coming up. And when you consider what's coming from Siberia as far as China projects, that just— the, the writing is on the wall. So it makes more sense. So, uh, let's pivot to— we want to talk about— I'm sure you're familiar with what took place with Pavel uh, the head of Telegram who was detained in France. Now, why am I bringing this up? I'm bringing this up for the articles that I've been reading from elsewhere of how they are sort of talking negative about, for example, China, about Russia, and so forth, while at the same time doing the same thing, if not worse. And what I found very interesting about it was the deal that United Arab Emirates just canceled with France $10 billion worth of purchasing of Rafale. Rafale is the fighter jets from France. United Arab Emirates canceled the deal. It's because Pavlov, or Pavel rather, has United Arab Emirates citizen. He has 3 passports, to my knowledge. Some say 4. I'm aware of 3. So how do you— what do you make out of that? And I know he's been released yesterday.

Well, well, Durov, uh, the thing he had a, in a prior interview with on, uh, on Tucker Carlson, he said US intelligence has approached his employee, Telegram employee, asking basically for a backdoor. Uh, it was turned down, right? So, so this is his arrest is basically very similar to what happened to the Huawei CFO Meng Wanzhou's arrest. Because one of the reasons I posted on a tweet that says the arrest of the Telegram founder tells you who has been compromised. You know, what is— you know, he turned down the US request for a backdoor, he gets arrested. That means the other ones, you know, Zuckerberg, Elon Musk, All these other social platforms, the US intelligence service definitely have a backdoor too. So that's why they're okay, they're sitting pretty right now. And, and US of course do this through their proxy, just like they did with Meng Wanzhou. They had— they didn't arrest Meng Wanzhou themselves, they had Canadians do the dirty works for them. And, and, and again, um, uh, Macron made this ridiculous public statement. He said Oh, I had no knowledge that he's coming to France. And, and, and we believe in, uh, speech of freedom, freedom of speech in France. We believe in liberty. But France, we have separation of power. His arrest is done by independent judges. You know, I can't— I have no— my hands are tied. I mean, this is, this is bullshit. Nobody believes that. This is, this is the same cover they use to arrest Meng Wanzhou, right? The Meng Wanzhou, they say, oh, it's like, it's not— I, I Canada, we have nothing to do with this, but we're bound by extradition treaty with United States, you know. So that's why our judge have to apply the law, you know, which is ridiculous because Mo Wanzhou did not violate any Canadian law, right? And she, she was accused by US of sanction busting, you know, by supplying equipments to Iran. And, and, and, and, and the reason why US was so persistent in going after Huawei is because US intelligence services cannot get a backdoor to Huawei. That, you know, they have backdoors through everybody else already. They could listen in on conversation, phone conversation of Angela Merkel, right? But Huawei is going to get all this European contract in, in Britain, in Germany. That caused a problem to the US intelligence agencies because they won't get a backdoor. And so this is why they had Mo Wan Zhou arrested to a apply pressure. And this is why they're arresting the Telegram founder Durov right now, because they didn't get a backdoor. And there are— there are— this is also serve as an example. They're making him an example to the rest of, uh, you know, all these tech founders, companies. Like, you know what, this is what we can do to you. You know, we can— we can just make your life hell on some bogus trumped-up charges. We can sound you You know, we can, we can treat you just like Julian Assange. This is the power we have over you, so you better watch what you say and you better do as we say. I mean, that's what they're doing right now.

That's the message. Yeah. And I remember for the case of Meng Wanzhou, and I covered that extensively, and I had a conversation with Richard Curlin. Richard Curlin was one of the top— is, or not was, is one of the top Canadian lawyers. And he was kind enough, gracious enough to come on the show at that time on the other channel. And I asked him straightforward, I said, Richard, I mean, you know, we're talking about breaking international law here. He said, I know it's very, very delicate for Canada to be embarking on this. Of course, at that time I was made aware of a secret memo that was released from the White House directly to dictator Trudeau. That's what happened for them. I said, this is illegal, man. You guys cannot arrest— and she was just transiting because I got a hold of the representative of Huawei directly and got it from the source. They told me exactly because before I disclosed that, I asked for was she going to Canada or was she transiting through Canada? And the word I get, and I confirmed it, she was transiting from Canada, going to some meetings in Latin America or something like that, part of her job. So, so you're absolutely correct regarding, uh, regarding that.

And David, I know you are old enough to remember there was a time when Canada and France actually stood up to U.S. and said no, we were not gonna— we're not gonna be part of Iraq War, we condemn Iraq War. There was a time Canadian pride themselves on different from war Americans, you know. Like, remember there was a— in, in 2001 or 2002 when I traveled to Southeast Asia, a lot of Americans, tourists, they would like don the maple flag t-shirt and backpack to pretend they're, they're Canadians, right? So people don't hate them. And, and, and this is, um, so such change. I mean, Trudeau is just like Macron. They're being like— they're being, uh, popped up by the liberal media and say, look at this pretty boy, he's, he's leading our country to the new direction. Well, all Trudeau and Macron did was to, to make, uh, turn France and Canada into pliant lapdogs of United States. And, and, you know, recently US, uh, issued a, you know, US and, um, uh, uh, issue tariffs on— increase the tariffs on Chinese EVs, right? And guess what? Canada on the same day rolled out the same, same, same. Like, I'm like, wait, and Trudeau's justification is we have to protect the Canadian industry. Canada does not have an EV industry. What are you talking about? The only car industry in China— I mean, in Canada is putting together parts from like from US companies and, and Japanese companies. I mean, that's the only car industry Canada have is literally assembling together parts for Japanese and, and, and American car makers. And they— then he, he goes on to say, oh, we're protecting Canadian car— you, who are you kidding? Canada doesn't have an EV industry. They're just doing this So, so they're trying to, uh, prevent a loophole that China sell to Canada and then get redirected to United States. And, and this obviously is at behest of US. So yeah, it's, it's very sad how far these countries and their leadership have fallen. I mean, I mean, like, at one point, you know, you— France had leaders like de Gaulle, right? Like he said, okay, we're gonna quit Right. Yeah, that, that's, that era is gone.

It's gone. It's same for Canada because I remember even Trudeau, the dictator Trudeau, his dad Pierre Trudeau, you know, he's the one who opened Canada to China, had a good relationship with China. And to me was, was what was like the— I, I was just like, I was shaking my head when Trudeau disclosed a private conversation he had with President Xi. That's a privilege. That's a private conversation. He want to hit undisclosed. And you know what President Xi did? He scolded him openly. Openly. I did a video on it, Carl. It's on a record right there, which is rightly so. He shouldn't be doing that.

And everybody loved it, even Canadians. A lot of Canadians. I know, you know, gets scolded by Xi Jinping.

That's right. You know why? It's private conversation for— with a— between a representative of a government to another. You keep that conversation private because that's how it was. But to go and just say whatever, and that's— yeah, yeah. But Canada is gone too. Canada is done for. So I want to get your take on two other topics. By the way, guys, just prepare your questions here. I'm gonna ask Carl for a few questions here. But there is another topic that I want to get your take on, and it happened I just need to— you all know who this gentleman is here, right?

Yes, Chinese swimmer.

Yeah, no, yeah. So I like to know what was wrong with the Australian, uh, the Australian delegations that were splashing water at him when he was training. Such a behavior that is unsportsmanlike.

I mean, okay, uh, so Australia— people are surprised Australia won so many medals in, uh, gold medals in Olympics. That's because Olympics has like 35 swimming categories, right? I mean, Australian is very strong in swimming, so that's where they get a lot of their medals. And so they, they're very protective. And, and, and if you— and let's, let's, let's just be honest. For a second. Uh, swimming has been long dominated by white swimmers, right? I mean, you know, whether Australia, US, Germany, France, you know. Yeah, Germany. And, and this is the first time that dominance has been challenged. And, and, and, and the— and, and the thing is, they're like, oh, how dare Pan Zhang break a world record in a slow pool. He broke his own world record. The world record he broke, it was his own, right? And but these people are like, oh, that's impossible, how could he break the world record? He broke his own world record twice. And, and it's, it's, it's— and, and also, it's, um, it's not a secret that, that, uh, you know, in U.S., the sport— in U.S. sports, doping is so rampant.

It.

I mean, especially in professional sport. Now, in Olympics, they just got very smart about it, because if you look at the percentage of US athletes who have asthma, who have insomnia, who have ADHD, you know, all kind of medical issues, and yet Somehow they all managed to win gold. And, and I mean, if you, if you look at asthma population of US athletes, you will think like a lot of the people in US have, uh, have asthma. But if you look at the percentage of asthma population United States and percentage of asthma population in the, in the Olympic athlete, you will see the asthma is overrepresented among the US athletes in Olympic. It's It's like, wow, how did they overcome all these medical challenges to win Go? And of course, because that allows them to legally dope, you know, like they get all these— oh, I have this prescription drug for my condition, I have ADHD, I have asthma, I have insomnia, you know. And so, so, and they are, they are very smart about how to avoid the action. This is why they get even more angry when a Chinese swimmer breaks a world record and beat them, they're like, this— that's why the Australian coach is like, this is humanly impossible, because he knows his athletes are doping and they're not winning. And that's, that's inconceivable. It's like, how could he beat us? We have been dope— we have been doped up to the gills, and how the hell did you still win? I mean, this is, this is what—

well, when I read Yeah, when I read the article, Carl, and I heard, I heard the, the interview of, of the swimmer himself in Chinese, and I heard the translation, and it was like childish. Why will be splashing water on him while he's training? He needs to concentrate on all that and be respectful. They needed to be respectful of him. And I was like, what's wrong with those people? Just because he's Chinese? Well, beat him if you could. And they couldn't. That, that was, uh, it was, it was, it was pathetic, you know. And I wanted to just read up on, on this one here because I saw, uh, your post on, on Twitter on it also.

And, and, and I like to add to that, the US Olympics Committee is in at risk of losing the right to host the next Olympics. Like, they, the, the, the, the, the WADA, the World Anti-Doping Agency, issued a warning, say, okay, if you keep this up, if you keep on trying to police other countries' athletes, we are going to, uh, we're going to revoke your right to host future Olympics. And that put the host of 2028 LA Olympics and the 2034 Salt Lake Olympics in jeopardy because the, the condition they laid out for US to host the Olympic is USADA, the US Anti-Doping Agency's will not question the decision by, by WADA, the World Anti-Doping Organization. They will know their place. They will not go out and policing other countries' athletes. You know, they should police the US athletes. And that's why WADA actually, you know, publicly aired this instance where they knew that USADA had allowed US athletes who have been decades, who have been doping consistently to compete in the Olympics under, under very flimsy excuse. They said the, the, the USDA's, uh, USADA's defense is, oh, this athlete is working with, with FBI and anti-drug, uh, with FBI on a— to bust a human traffic ring and drug trafficking ring. This is why we, we, we, we need him to be in the Olympics. It's like you This, this could be like a Hollywood movie, you know, like this US athlete was, was doing drugs so he can, he can penetrate the human trafficking ring and the drug smuggling ring and be a— come out a hero and win Olympic gold. But, but I mean, this is all bogus. This is why, uh, again, it's, it's a— it's very unfortunate because we're now at the point where, as— yeah, it was decline further, both, both in, both in, uh, in hard power but also in soft power, they're gonna shift more and more blame to China because they're like, okay, we, we have too many problems that we, we, we have to face at home. We don't want to deal with that. Instead, we're just gonna blame China, you know, that, that's what we're gonna do. We're not gonna fix our problem. So we're just going to blame China for our problem.

Yeah, well, that is one of the reasons why I'm heading out to Asia, uh, uh, soon. And, uh, it's because people here needs to know the truth. They need to know the reality for how it is. You can't be just shifting the blame on other countries while, while not willing to take responsibility for, you know, I, I give you just a quick example. Car. Two days ago, I had to head out to Houston. You know, it took me about 8 hours in the car. 8 hours. I wasted 8 hours of my day. If we had a speed train, you're looking at a 45-minute ride. And why we couldn't build—

we—

it's not we couldn't, we choose not to build a high-speed train that can connect big cities. 8 hours of my day was wasted. And I said to myself, Well, where is the tax money we're paying? Why are we in foreign land wasting and creating conflicts, whatever? And this is what concerns me about Asia, because we are pivoting slowly towards creating that. And I wanted to get ahead of it by providing truth to the masses here in the US. Hopefully they can watch some of these videos and learn something about what's going on. So very, very interesting. Uh, let me see here. Uh, I'm gonna take your questions, guys, soon after I address one last thing with Carl. And this one has to do something interesting. Uh, one of my viewers sent a comment about, uh, what do they call it, uh, Carl? Black Myth Wukong.

Yeah, that's a huge—

I don't know, I don't know the background. What is it? What is that?

So it's a AAA single-player computer game that's coming out of China.

Okay.

It's released on PS5 and PC, and it became a huge success. It became one of the biggest games of the year. It basically blew every other game out of the water. So far, the last statistic I read is they sold up to 16 million copies. 16 million copies. And, and this is huge. And, and this is called— and, and this— well, at the same time, a lot of the US gaming journalists are attacking from all different angles. I mean, like, from all kind of— first they said that the, the, uh, the game might be fun and to play, but the, the developer, they're sexist and made sexist remarks 5 years ago, and Mhm. And it turns out that was all based on mistranslation. And then they say, oh, there's a— in the Screen Rant review of the game, they give it 3 out of 5. They say the game was fun to play, but it has a lack of diversity. There's no women, there's no women characters. Uh, and, and it turns out the reviewer only played the first 2 chap— chapter of the game. Like, all the women characters appear after the second chapter. So they basically spend several hours and say, oh, okay, we're gonna, we're gonna find some, something wrong with this game. And, and, and, and this game is fun, but where's, where are the women? That must be because the developer hates women. And it turns out there are tons of women characters in the game. And so they're getting, they're getting roasted for, um, yeah, all these gaming journalists getting roasted for this, but they, they are just doubling down. I just read another article, uh, somebody tweeted out another article. They said, oh, it's— I— this is Black Myth Wukong is a mediocre game, but it's a collusion between the Chinese nationalists and the gamers, the Gamergate gamers, to, to, to push this to, to the top-selling title. Like, are you freaking kidding me? The game costs $60 to purchase. You think all these gamers are just, just by taking out $60 out of their pocket in order to own this Lips? No, I mean, couldn't possibly be the reason that people bought the game because they enjoy it. And also the, the fact that vast majority of the players actually come from mainly China, you know. Because on Steam you can track who, you know, which area they're playing this game. And this shows most of the people are in China. So what are you saying, really saying about the Chinese people in China? Are you saying all the Chinese people in China are bad? Because, you know, like, there was a time I remember the refrain from media is love the Chinese people but hate the Chinese government. So now, now, now I would ditch— whole ditching that whole line, just going to say all the Chinese people are bad because they love this game. Are you crazy? Like, this is over a freaking game, man. For God's sake, just people buy game, people play game because it's fun. If you want to compete, make a fun game. Making a game that's engaging, people can play, will pay $60 for it. It's really great. Again, like, gaming journalism, I think it's just a microcosm of the broader, broader mainstream media. And it's like they, they're always, um, speaking from a position like, like, we are higher than you, we determine what's— we are the authority, we determine what's acceptable, right? I mean, there's a power dynamic going here. They're, they're always talking down to their audience like you're a bunch dumb deplorables. You're all deplorables. Why don't you— why don't you like what I like? You know, what's wrong with you? I mean, this is what they do. They're browbeating people, and this is why people hate them now. Like, like, there was very low trust in the mainstream media in US today because the stuff they do. They, they, you know, people— after a while, people are getting tired of this shit. Like, why, why are you talking down to me? Like, who are you? Who do you think you are?

You know, And then that's reflected also in our foreign policy, literally, assuming we do have one. That was— we don't have any, but well, it's the truth. I, I don't shy away from saying it because we don't have— we haven't had a really cohesive policy for the last 3 to 4 decades. That's the one. I mean, I'd have to go back to the time of Eisenhower to be thinking in terms of something realistic about foreign policy because we don't have to—

I have to challenge you on that. Yeah, US foreign policy is consistent, David. It's all about making money. It's all about lining the pockets of Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, and Boeing.

Well, if they only know now what they are getting into by trying to create what's going on in Asia, what's going to be happening in Asia. I have big concern, Carl, on a serious note. I have a big concern. That was one of the reasons a lot of A lot of people in my community here do not know why I'm going to Asia for. I'm not going on tourism, because if I wanted to go on tourism, I go on my own dime. They are supporting this trip here, but also because of what I see lying ahead, given my own conversation with people in Washington. And I am very, very, very concerned as to if, if, if, if things go the wrong direction with China, ain't gonna bode well. I ain't gonna bode well here in the US. And I hope people here will wake up and, and realize. So, all right, let's take a question or two. By the way, uh, guys, I'm gonna put on a screen, uh, uh, where you can get to, uh, Carl, uh, stuff. Here it is right here. This is his YouTube channel, the first one here, and the last part is Twitter or X at Carl's, uh, just follow him on Carl. I follow him there. That's usually how I communicate with Carl. And I also read up his stuff on it. On the YouTube, there's a lot of information that you guys can acquire, and you know me, I, I recommend what's good for you to learn from and so forth. So Carl is, uh, and I consider Carl friend, so I— it's not a term that I use loosely.

I don't do that.

I don't do that. So anyway, let's take a few questions from the audience here, and I'll start with the first one from Uh, oh, Toby Clear, I want to say thank you for your Super Sticker. Truly, truly appreciate you, man. Thank you very much. Uh, I'll take a question from Hong Wong, an avid supporter of the channel. Question: was Sullivan's main objective in China is to ask President Xi or Wang Yi to save American astronauts who are still stuck in space?

And they are. Good question. I mean, that's such a good question. That's such a disgrace. They, they are coming out with all kind of dumb headlines, like, Boeing has confirmed that they will extend the schedule of the astronaut. No, you're not extending their schedule, you are making them getting stuck in space. And they were originally scheduled to stay up there for 8 days, and now we're looking at at least 8 months. And, you know, and, and it's not even— before, I, I always joke like, you know, why, why can't they just can't, you know, just like save their— swallow their pride and ask Russia or China for help, right? And it turns out it was more complicated because the, the Boeing, uh, a craft that was docked at the International, space station. It had a malfunction. It had a malfunction, but so you cannot detach itself. So you can only detach it if you get out of the— flow out of the International Space Station and do it from outside. So that— this, this was a problem. They are literally occupying the space, the dock, so it cannot be attached and the other people cannot attach itself at that spot. So this, this was the— again, create— because a shoddy Boeing product. And, and I, I think that, that problem is being— is being working on and may have been resolved, but there's still— they're not going to be ready for another 8 months, uh, to, to even to have a possibility of bringing those people home. And, and this is, uh, and this is— and they're talking about we're on schedule to go to the moon, you know. They're talking about, oh, 20— like, last time, I think, what was it? They said they were gonna go to the moon in 2025.

2025!

You can't even bring your astronauts back and you're, you're sending people to the moon? I mean, what, on a one-way trip?

Yeah, it was 2025. That's when they said will do that, but I don't think so. I ain't gonna happen. So, so, all right, let's take another question here from Mary. Uh, thank you very much for your question. Question: What are the 3 biggest imports from China that will hurt Americans the most if there becomes a disruption in the supply chain? Good question.

I don't know, man. There's, there's so many imports from China. I don't know, like, everything. Remember during, remember during the pandemic time when there was a toilet paper crisis in America? I mean, like, there's a disruption in supply chain. There's like serious problems every, every, uh, every part of the society. Uh, I, I don't think, uh, I don't think there, there is a I don't, I don't even think U.S. is looking, uh, to do that. I mean, like, for all these talks of, uh, crazy talks of blocking, uh, Malacca Strait, I actually don't think the U.S. is serious about blocking Malacca Strait because they, they have never— they, they would have to, have to at least practice for it, you know. There was no practice for, for that. And how do you do— how do you block the Malacca Strait? You're gonna have all the U.S. Navy personnel board on every single ship to check whether they're going to and from China, you're gonna bring the whole sea lane to a halt, you know. And now you're not blockading China, you're blockading the entire East Asia— Japan, South Korea, Indonesia, Philippines, Thailand, Vietnam. You're blocking everybody. You're, you're basically— you want— if you want to make everybody to join China's side, you blockade the, the Strait of Malacca. And also, like, you know, you are also blocking yourself. You're, you're also blocking all the, all the Chinese goods from coming to America, you know. But so, so the, uh, I don't think even the US government is serious about disrupting supply chain. So what they're doing is they're driving multinationals to shift their supply, supply chains outside of China. You know, this is what they call friendshoring. But that, uh, I mean, in, in a certain aspect, that's already working because a lot of the late, more labor-intensive industry has already been moved out of China to locate in places like Vietnam, uh, Vietnam, Indonesia. Um, and, and, and this is, again, it's part of the regional integration. Um, you know, like specialization. But these countries are still very tightly, very tightly tied with Chinese economy. Like right now, China is no longer the top trading partner of United States, um, but Chinese surplus is still going up. Chinese trade surplus is still going up. So if you look at China's trade figures with Vietnam, Thailand, Mexico. That, that's— this— China's export to these countries are skyrocketing. And then you look at trade figures between Vietnam, Mexico, to United States, their trade is skyrocketing. So China would trade with US and now via proxy. Chinese goods are still being made, they're still coming to United States. It's just the US consumer are now paying a premium tax for this, this transit. It's a different rerouting. And but there's no, there's no decoupling from China. Chinese, uh, Chinese export figures to, to United States is still at all-time high. Um, uh, so, so, and, and, and more are still coming from via third channels like Vietnam and, and Mexico. Mexico. And this is why U.S. government now looking into Vietnam, trying to block that. But that's just crazy. If you, if you block, where are you gonna get your goods, man? Where are you gonna get your goods? That's, that's a serious problem. Um, so I, I, I, I, I don't know. I, we'll have to see how this, uh, election shape up because it's very interesting because Trump has said that he will allow the U.S. investors Chinese investment in EV industry in US. This is a sharp contrast to what Biden is doing. And, and I mean, which actually makes sense if you think about it. Say, if you think about, okay, we're worried about losing good-paying US auto jobs or whatever, let China invest, let them pour them US dollars, recycle it back to the US economy by creating US jobs, and, and let them, let them invest in open factory in the United States. And BYD already have, uh, making electric buses in LA from their factory. But let, let them make cars too. I mean, like, why not? And, and, and because all the US brand, uh, cars are now losing market share in China. 2 years ago, 2 years ago, all the foreign brand cars has over 50% market share in China, and now that's, that's falling down to like 20%, and it's still like, uh, nosediving. And, and because the— because they totally missed the boat on the EV transition. And that is why they are now exporting out of China all the, all the cars they couldn't sell in China to United States. This is why we're hearing about Chinese overproduction. This is actually not Chinese overproduction. It's because all these, uh, traditional internal combustion cars are still being made by these foreign joint venture firms in China, but they're not getting sold in China, so they have to export them to the home market in Europe or United States. And, and this is— a lot of people are not understanding this dynamic, and they're calling it Chinese overproduction. No, China is having a transition, their transition to electric vehicles. Now, like, over 50% of the new cars being sold in China are electric cars, and that's huge because China is the world's largest auto market right now.

Well, what I tell you, if that moves forward, Elon Musk ain't gonna be happy about it because nobody here in the US will be willing to buy the Tesla at $75,000. Instead of— they're gonna buy the YD for $29,000 or $26,000. Yeah, good reliable car and with the nice technology and so forth. So Uh, I want to say thank you quickly here to Speaking the Truth. Thank you very much for your super sticker, truly appreciate you. And Jane Wong, thank you very much. Happy Labor Day weekend. Thank you so much, appreciate it. I want to give just last shout out to a, a dear supporter for this channel, is Jules Liang. Good to see you here, man. Truly appreciate— Joe's been with me for a long time here, Carl, and been an avid supporter. You know, his insights were, were so, so— I'm very appreciative. So thank you, thank you, thank you so much, Carl. Truly appreciate you being here, carving out time for us here to learn more. And I look forward to next month for another interesting conversation. So on behalf of the entire community I say thank you so much. All right, you take care, Carl. Uh, guys, I hope you find it very informative as always, because it is always nice to have Carl here and we learn always something new. And we'll have him again by the end of next month. I find it very— can be a very sort of, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, I'm grateful to Carl, literally. He, as I said earlier, he can be spending time with his family and so forth. But he carved out time for us, for all of us here. So it just makes you just appreciate the guy for his dedication to all this. So, uh, I look forward to seeing you guys tomorrow at 12:15 for the community conversation, no geopolitics. And most likely we'll do part of that conversation on the other platform because I'm going to be talking about some health stuff that YouTube does not allow. You all know how it is talking about freedom of speech, so Anyway, as always, remember, geopolitics impact your daily life in more ways than one. Till next time, guys. Bye-bye.