Hotznplotzn

joined 1 year ago
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/51870372

Archived

...

The family of human rights defender Yang Li, who recently spent 15 months in detention for her advocacy on land rights, says that her condition has deteriorated to end-stage kidney failure following prolonged inability to access medical care during and following her time in custody.

According to the family, since her release police have repeatedly blocked her travel to Beijing to receive potentially life-saving dialysis treatment, restricting her freedom of movement to her home in the eastern province of Jiangsu.

The ‘Two Sessions’ – annual meetings of Chinese Party and government leadership that set the tone for political, social and economic reforms for the year to come – began on Wednesday 4 March with the elite Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, while the regular, rubberstamp National People’s Congress (NPC) annual session started on Thursday.

“Keeping Yang Li from essential treatment is unconscionable. Denying urgent care to a critically ill woman – seemingly in retaliation for her peaceful advocacy – is a glaring violation of China’s duty to respect and fulfil the right to health of all,” said Sarah Brooks, Amnesty International’s Deputy Regional Director.

“As China’s leaders gather for the ‘Two Sessions’, we expect to hear about their commitment to improving peoples’ lives and ensuring social services; this must be matched by action and applied to all.

[...]

Yang Li, 46, is a land rights defender from Jintan, Jiangsu, who for years has pursued lawful channels to challenge land expropriation by local government and related human rights abuses. She was detained for her work between October 2024 and December 2025, during which time she allegedly faced torture and was denied medical treatment in violation of international standards, namely the Mandela Rules, which make clear that prisoners should enjoy the same standards of health care as non-incarcerated individuals.

Civil society groups following the case say police repeatedly blocked Yang’s attempts to reach Peking University No. 1 Hospital in January 2026 and confiscated phones from her and her father.

[...]

It appears that Yang did manage to make it to Beijing in early February. A hospitalization notice for Yang Li was issued by Peking University No. 1 Hospital on 11 February, but the activist was not admitted and has since been forcibly returned once again by the police to Jiangsu, where the family fears further refusal of appropriate care.

[...]

 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/51870372

Archived

...

The family of human rights defender Yang Li, who recently spent 15 months in detention for her advocacy on land rights, says that her condition has deteriorated to end-stage kidney failure following prolonged inability to access medical care during and following her time in custody.

According to the family, since her release police have repeatedly blocked her travel to Beijing to receive potentially life-saving dialysis treatment, restricting her freedom of movement to her home in the eastern province of Jiangsu.

The ‘Two Sessions’ – annual meetings of Chinese Party and government leadership that set the tone for political, social and economic reforms for the year to come – began on Wednesday 4 March with the elite Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, while the regular, rubberstamp National People’s Congress (NPC) annual session started on Thursday.

“Keeping Yang Li from essential treatment is unconscionable. Denying urgent care to a critically ill woman – seemingly in retaliation for her peaceful advocacy – is a glaring violation of China’s duty to respect and fulfil the right to health of all,” said Sarah Brooks, Amnesty International’s Deputy Regional Director.

“As China’s leaders gather for the ‘Two Sessions’, we expect to hear about their commitment to improving peoples’ lives and ensuring social services; this must be matched by action and applied to all.

[...]

Yang Li, 46, is a land rights defender from Jintan, Jiangsu, who for years has pursued lawful channels to challenge land expropriation by local government and related human rights abuses. She was detained for her work between October 2024 and December 2025, during which time she allegedly faced torture and was denied medical treatment in violation of international standards, namely the Mandela Rules, which make clear that prisoners should enjoy the same standards of health care as non-incarcerated individuals.

Civil society groups following the case say police repeatedly blocked Yang’s attempts to reach Peking University No. 1 Hospital in January 2026 and confiscated phones from her and her father.

[...]

It appears that Yang did manage to make it to Beijing in early February. A hospitalization notice for Yang Li was issued by Peking University No. 1 Hospital on 11 February, but the activist was not admitted and has since been forcibly returned once again by the police to Jiangsu, where the family fears further refusal of appropriate care.

[...]

 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/51870372

Archived

...

The family of human rights defender Yang Li, who recently spent 15 months in detention for her advocacy on land rights, says that her condition has deteriorated to end-stage kidney failure following prolonged inability to access medical care during and following her time in custody.

According to the family, since her release police have repeatedly blocked her travel to Beijing to receive potentially life-saving dialysis treatment, restricting her freedom of movement to her home in the eastern province of Jiangsu.

The ‘Two Sessions’ – annual meetings of Chinese Party and government leadership that set the tone for political, social and economic reforms for the year to come – began on Wednesday 4 March with the elite Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, while the regular, rubberstamp National People’s Congress (NPC) annual session started on Thursday.

“Keeping Yang Li from essential treatment is unconscionable. Denying urgent care to a critically ill woman – seemingly in retaliation for her peaceful advocacy – is a glaring violation of China’s duty to respect and fulfil the right to health of all,” said Sarah Brooks, Amnesty International’s Deputy Regional Director.

“As China’s leaders gather for the ‘Two Sessions’, we expect to hear about their commitment to improving peoples’ lives and ensuring social services; this must be matched by action and applied to all.

[...]

Yang Li, 46, is a land rights defender from Jintan, Jiangsu, who for years has pursued lawful channels to challenge land expropriation by local government and related human rights abuses. She was detained for her work between October 2024 and December 2025, during which time she allegedly faced torture and was denied medical treatment in violation of international standards, namely the Mandela Rules, which make clear that prisoners should enjoy the same standards of health care as non-incarcerated individuals.

Civil society groups following the case say police repeatedly blocked Yang’s attempts to reach Peking University No. 1 Hospital in January 2026 and confiscated phones from her and her father.

[...]

It appears that Yang did manage to make it to Beijing in early February. A hospitalization notice for Yang Li was issued by Peking University No. 1 Hospital on 11 February, but the activist was not admitted and has since been forcibly returned once again by the police to Jiangsu, where the family fears further refusal of appropriate care.

[...]

 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/51870372

Archived

...

The family of human rights defender Yang Li, who recently spent 15 months in detention for her advocacy on land rights, says that her condition has deteriorated to end-stage kidney failure following prolonged inability to access medical care during and following her time in custody.

According to the family, since her release police have repeatedly blocked her travel to Beijing to receive potentially life-saving dialysis treatment, restricting her freedom of movement to her home in the eastern province of Jiangsu.

The ‘Two Sessions’ – annual meetings of Chinese Party and government leadership that set the tone for political, social and economic reforms for the year to come – began on Wednesday 4 March with the elite Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, while the regular, rubberstamp National People’s Congress (NPC) annual session started on Thursday.

“Keeping Yang Li from essential treatment is unconscionable. Denying urgent care to a critically ill woman – seemingly in retaliation for her peaceful advocacy – is a glaring violation of China’s duty to respect and fulfil the right to health of all,” said Sarah Brooks, Amnesty International’s Deputy Regional Director.

“As China’s leaders gather for the ‘Two Sessions’, we expect to hear about their commitment to improving peoples’ lives and ensuring social services; this must be matched by action and applied to all.

[...]

Yang Li, 46, is a land rights defender from Jintan, Jiangsu, who for years has pursued lawful channels to challenge land expropriation by local government and related human rights abuses. She was detained for her work between October 2024 and December 2025, during which time she allegedly faced torture and was denied medical treatment in violation of international standards, namely the Mandela Rules, which make clear that prisoners should enjoy the same standards of health care as non-incarcerated individuals.

Civil society groups following the case say police repeatedly blocked Yang’s attempts to reach Peking University No. 1 Hospital in January 2026 and confiscated phones from her and her father.

[...]

It appears that Yang did manage to make it to Beijing in early February. A hospitalization notice for Yang Li was issued by Peking University No. 1 Hospital on 11 February, but the activist was not admitted and has since been forcibly returned once again by the police to Jiangsu, where the family fears further refusal of appropriate care.

[...]

 

Archived

...

The family of human rights defender Yang Li, who recently spent 15 months in detention for her advocacy on land rights, says that her condition has deteriorated to end-stage kidney failure following prolonged inability to access medical care during and following her time in custody.

According to the family, since her release police have repeatedly blocked her travel to Beijing to receive potentially life-saving dialysis treatment, restricting her freedom of movement to her home in the eastern province of Jiangsu.

The ‘Two Sessions’ – annual meetings of Chinese Party and government leadership that set the tone for political, social and economic reforms for the year to come – began on Wednesday 4 March with the elite Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, while the regular, rubberstamp National People’s Congress (NPC) annual session started on Thursday.

“Keeping Yang Li from essential treatment is unconscionable. Denying urgent care to a critically ill woman – seemingly in retaliation for her peaceful advocacy – is a glaring violation of China’s duty to respect and fulfil the right to health of all,” said Sarah Brooks, Amnesty International’s Deputy Regional Director.

“As China’s leaders gather for the ‘Two Sessions’, we expect to hear about their commitment to improving peoples’ lives and ensuring social services; this must be matched by action and applied to all.

[...]

Yang Li, 46, is a land rights defender from Jintan, Jiangsu, who for years has pursued lawful channels to challenge land expropriation by local government and related human rights abuses. She was detained for her work between October 2024 and December 2025, during which time she allegedly faced torture and was denied medical treatment in violation of international standards, namely the Mandela Rules, which make clear that prisoners should enjoy the same standards of health care as non-incarcerated individuals.

Civil society groups following the case say police repeatedly blocked Yang’s attempts to reach Peking University No. 1 Hospital in January 2026 and confiscated phones from her and her father.

[...]

It appears that Yang did manage to make it to Beijing in early February. A hospitalization notice for Yang Li was issued by Peking University No. 1 Hospital on 11 February, but the activist was not admitted and has since been forcibly returned once again by the police to Jiangsu, where the family fears further refusal of appropriate care.

[...]

 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/51861696

The Royal Mint Court Residents’ Association (RMCRA) has filed a High Court challenge to the UK Government’s decision to grant planning permission for the redevelopment of the Royal Mint Court site into a new Chinese “super-embassy”.

Archived

RMCRA is supported in its legal challenge by the Inter‑Parliamentary Alliance on China and is represented by law firm Leigh Day.

RMCRA residents live in around 100 homes in St Mary Graces Court, the residential part of Royal Mint Court that sits directly beside the proposed embassy site.

RMCRA argues that the Government’s decision was unlawful, procedurally unfair, and failed to take into account key factors including the implications of granting planning permission for a site already designated as diplomatic premises, and therefore given special legal protection that prevents the UK from entering the site or enforcing planning rules there.

Residents also say the Government approved the development without properly addressing everyday issues such as the impact of potential protests, emergency access and public safety, and without explaining how the UK can enforce safety‑critical conditions on premises that it is legally barred from entering.

Residents are also challenging the decision to commit public money to national security measures linked to the development. On the same day planning permission was granted, the Minister for Security announced a package of Government‑funded measures to protect sensitive telecommunications infrastructure near the site. Residents argue that the public money spent on these measures should have been openly assessed as part of the decision.

[...]

 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/51861696

The Royal Mint Court Residents’ Association (RMCRA) has filed a High Court challenge to the UK Government’s decision to grant planning permission for the redevelopment of the Royal Mint Court site into a new Chinese “super-embassy”.

Archived

RMCRA is supported in its legal challenge by the Inter‑Parliamentary Alliance on China and is represented by law firm Leigh Day.

RMCRA residents live in around 100 homes in St Mary Graces Court, the residential part of Royal Mint Court that sits directly beside the proposed embassy site.

RMCRA argues that the Government’s decision was unlawful, procedurally unfair, and failed to take into account key factors including the implications of granting planning permission for a site already designated as diplomatic premises, and therefore given special legal protection that prevents the UK from entering the site or enforcing planning rules there.

Residents also say the Government approved the development without properly addressing everyday issues such as the impact of potential protests, emergency access and public safety, and without explaining how the UK can enforce safety‑critical conditions on premises that it is legally barred from entering.

Residents are also challenging the decision to commit public money to national security measures linked to the development. On the same day planning permission was granted, the Minister for Security announced a package of Government‑funded measures to protect sensitive telecommunications infrastructure near the site. Residents argue that the public money spent on these measures should have been openly assessed as part of the decision.

[...]

 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/51861767

Philippine authorities have apprehended three defense personnel who allegedly spied on behalf of China in what the country’s security agency has described as a “serious national security matter,” its spokesman said Thursday.

Archived

The trio, who worked for the Philippine Department of Defense, Navy and Coast Guard, provided their Chinese handlers with lists of military personnel and other sensitive information, National Security Council (NSC) spokesman Cornelio Valencia told AFP.

Operational details about resupply missions in the contested South China Sea, where China and the Philippines have frequently clashed in recent years, were also included in the information handed over, he said.

[...]

 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/51861696

The Royal Mint Court Residents’ Association (RMCRA) has filed a High Court challenge to the UK Government’s decision to grant planning permission for the redevelopment of the Royal Mint Court site into a new Chinese “super-embassy”.

Archived

RMCRA is supported in its legal challenge by the Inter‑Parliamentary Alliance on China and is represented by law firm Leigh Day.

RMCRA residents live in around 100 homes in St Mary Graces Court, the residential part of Royal Mint Court that sits directly beside the proposed embassy site.

RMCRA argues that the Government’s decision was unlawful, procedurally unfair, and failed to take into account key factors including the implications of granting planning permission for a site already designated as diplomatic premises, and therefore given special legal protection that prevents the UK from entering the site or enforcing planning rules there.

Residents also say the Government approved the development without properly addressing everyday issues such as the impact of potential protests, emergency access and public safety, and without explaining how the UK can enforce safety‑critical conditions on premises that it is legally barred from entering.

Residents are also challenging the decision to commit public money to national security measures linked to the development. On the same day planning permission was granted, the Minister for Security announced a package of Government‑funded measures to protect sensitive telecommunications infrastructure near the site. Residents argue that the public money spent on these measures should have been openly assessed as part of the decision.

[...]

 

Philippine authorities have apprehended three defense personnel who allegedly spied on behalf of China in what the country’s security agency has described as a “serious national security matter,” its spokesman said Thursday.

Archived

The trio, who worked for the Philippine Department of Defense, Navy and Coast Guard, provided their Chinese handlers with lists of military personnel and other sensitive information, National Security Council (NSC) spokesman Cornelio Valencia told AFP.

Operational details about resupply missions in the contested South China Sea, where China and the Philippines have frequently clashed in recent years, were also included in the information handed over, he said.

[...]

 

The Royal Mint Court Residents’ Association (RMCRA) has filed a High Court challenge to the UK Government’s decision to grant planning permission for the redevelopment of the Royal Mint Court site into a new Chinese “super-embassy”.

Archived

RMCRA is supported in its legal challenge by the Inter‑Parliamentary Alliance on China and is represented by law firm Leigh Day.

RMCRA residents live in around 100 homes in St Mary Graces Court, the residential part of Royal Mint Court that sits directly beside the proposed embassy site.

RMCRA argues that the Government’s decision was unlawful, procedurally unfair, and failed to take into account key factors including the implications of granting planning permission for a site already designated as diplomatic premises, and therefore given special legal protection that prevents the UK from entering the site or enforcing planning rules there.

Residents also say the Government approved the development without properly addressing everyday issues such as the impact of potential protests, emergency access and public safety, and without explaining how the UK can enforce safety‑critical conditions on premises that it is legally barred from entering.

Residents are also challenging the decision to commit public money to national security measures linked to the development. On the same day planning permission was granted, the Minister for Security announced a package of Government‑funded measures to protect sensitive telecommunications infrastructure near the site. Residents argue that the public money spent on these measures should have been openly assessed as part of the decision.

[...]

[–] Hotznplotzn@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 1 day ago

It all depends what Ukraine gets in return I would say.

 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/51813032

British police arrested three men, including the husband of a sitting MP, on suspicion of spying for China. The news comes weeks after Keir Starmer traveled to Beijing in a bid to repair ties with the country.

[...]

British police said in a statement

that three men were arrested on suspicion of assisting a foreign intelligence service.

That stood in violation of section 3 of the National Security Act, 2023, which was introduced to give authorities greater power to tackle foreign interference.

In the statement, police confirmed that the country in question was China. The statement didn't name the men, in keeping with UK practice.

All three men, aged 39, 43 and 68, remain in custody.

[...]

According to UK media reports, David Taylor, who is married to Joani Reid, the Labour lawmaker representing the East Kilbride area, was arrested.

Reid said in a statement to newspapers like the Times and Telegraph that she had "never seen anything to make me suspect my husband has broken any law."

"I am not part of my husband’s business activities and neither I nor my children are part of this investigation," it read. "I have never been to China. I have never spoken on China or China-related ​matters in the (House of) Commons."

Asked about the reports in parliament, Dan Jarvis, the security minister, declined to give any further details. Jarvis said later in a statement: "We will always challenge any country, including China, that attempts to interfere with or undermine the integrity of our democratic institutions."

[...]

Last November, Britain's domestic intelligence agency warned British lawmakers that China was using headhunters on LinkedIn and other covert operatives to recruit and compromise them.

That rare warning bell came two months after a political scandal erupted in the country over the collapse of an espionage case against two British men accused of passing sensitive information to China.

The new arrests now present a new challenge for Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who has pledged to reset ties with China after years of mistrust complicated ties between the countries.

[...]

[–] Hotznplotzn@lemmy.sdf.org 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

That was my first thought, too. But as the article also says,

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has also said that Ukraine is ready to help protect Gulf countries from the Iranian regime, but is asking them to help Ukraine in return.

If all sides are willing, they will find a way I hope.

[–] Hotznplotzn@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 2 days ago

Source (Sixth Tone) is a Chinese state-funded soft-power outlet. That should not be relevant to this report, which is simply decent journalism.

This is always relevant, one reason being that they intentionally suppress certain information to spread propaganda and propagnada only. It's the outlet's sole raison d'être. This so-called "soft power" comes from the same dictatorial political system. It is an inherently bad and unreliable source and has nothing to do with decent journalism.

[–] Hotznplotzn@lemmy.sdf.org 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

It is a really racist and dictatorial policy:

The new law was needed to provide better legal safeguards for the party’s “ethnic work” in order to “maintain the security and stability of China’s border regions and ethnic regions [...]

and

[there is] “no way” that non-Han people would be able to safely express “any type of discontent without being accused of being essentially separatists or terrorists."

[–] Hotznplotzn@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 3 days ago

but I would be surprised if China doesn’t come out stronger, some how.

How so?

[–] Hotznplotzn@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 4 days ago

I wouldn't say it is a different argument. China is using this for its propaganda, portraying itself as a 'democracy' and stable government valuing the rule of law. But this is not reality. Beijing just uses Trump's actions for vindication, although China has long been a dictatorship long before Trump.

[–] Hotznplotzn@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (2 children)

I don't know what Trump exactly wants in Venezuela and Iran, of course, but the wars here and there hit China massively.

Both Venezuela, the country with the largest known oil reserves, and Iran are (were?) ideal partners for China's global business model built on commodity-based lending. It works quite simple: a Chinese bank close to its government loans the money, the borrower required to sell commodities to a buyer in China, and the commodities proceeds will then be redirected to the bank service the loan. As these trades often occur at predefined prices, China benefits not only by gaining political influence in the selling country - often politically isolated and whose primary source of income is the commodity - but also by making itself a bit independent form fluctuating oil prices.

China has similar deals with a wide range of countries to whom it provides loans for commodities: in Zimbabwe China purchases platinum with such agreements, in Zambia cobalt and copper, in Ghana bauxite.

In Venezuela, the China Development Bank financed the loans for the government in Caracas. The commodity purchase contract involved Venezuela's state-owned oil company Petróleos de Venezuela SA and a Chinese state-owned oil purchaser. The loan is then being repaid by the proceeds from Petróleos de Venezuela SA’s revenue stream from oil sales.

Venezuela is the largest borrower of this Chinese state-backed lending scheme in South America and the fourth largest globally. Between 2000 and 2023, China granted loans totaling USD 95 billion to Venezuela via this scheme, which is roughly 90% of China's total loan volume to Venezuela, according to AidData.

Amidst the current turmoils, however, the supposed convenience has a hefty price as China's credit risk is highly concentrated in a single commodity - in Venezuela's case, oil. Any fundamental change in Venezuela's oil industry would inevitably effect repayment terms (and enforcement conditions) of Caracas's debt to Beijing.

The situation in Iran is similar. China has been buying cheap oil form sanction-hit Iran for a long time. China accounts for more than 80% of Iran’s maritime crude oil exports, and Iranian oil accounts for 13% of China's oil imports. If Iran is forced to shut the Street of Hormuz, it has a much wider impact as 45% of China's (and 20% of the world's) oil and gas supply is shipped through this small lane in the gulf.

For a short period of time, China may be able to even benefit from a possible oil scarcity. It has bought a huge stockpile and could be able to sell its refined oil to others at a reasonable price. But Beijing has no reason to celebrate as this will be short-term. In the long run, the situation will cause a lot of troubles for China.

This is not to say that the US is deliberately aiming at China. I don't understand what the current administration is doing as Trump appears to contradict himself perpetually. But the impact on China is tremendous imho, at least this is how I interpret the data.

I apologize for the long comment.

[–] Hotznplotzn@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Dude, I am not here to win an argument. You are coming up with a series of allegations upon which you form your opinion, but you don't provide any report, article, or anything that fosters this opinion.

But then you criticize sources linked by other while claiming you are right.

If you are not able to provide even a glimpse of evidence of what you say, I end this discussion.

[–] Hotznplotzn@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 4 days ago (3 children)

There is even a study investigating the Flix pricing.

  • Fares of long-distance bus service are determined by a profit-maximizing strategy known as revenue management..
  • At each point in time fares follow an increasing stepwise distribution in the number of sold seats (capacity effect).
  • The increasing trend of the lowest available fare during the booking period is mainly driven by the capacity effect.
  • The decreasing option value of seats is in place during the last week before departure (temporal effect).

We see such pricing methods everywhere, especially in transportation. But it has nothing to do with the type of payment but the time. You'd pay the higher price later even if you paid digital, there is no cash penalty.

[–] Hotznplotzn@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 4 days ago (5 children)

I don't know of such price hikes. But if you choose to pay online now or in cash at a later point (supposedly immediately before departure) you may pay more. But this usually hasn't to do with the type of payment (digital or cash) but rather because you pay later at the time of departure or shortly before.

It's basically the kind of revenue management you see in airline ticketing: the sooner you buy, the lower the price. But it is not a 'penalty' for using cash.

I really never heard about such stories.

[–] Hotznplotzn@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 5 days ago (7 children)

Are there at least some links where you can compare prices?

Where do you pay 4 times more in cash as compared to digital payments? I have never seen this nor other stories in you text as others have already said.

[–] Hotznplotzn@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 5 days ago

Ukraine could also demand Taurus in exchange for their expertise.

view more: next ›