Western media regurgitates scripts written by the intelligence community and Deep State. Right now they have China in their sites. From Jerry Grey at antiwar.com:
One of the most important skills a journalist needs is the skill of research. Proper research and investigation even into the most-simple of stories is vitally important, news should be accurate, verified and unbiased. However, when it comes to China, Western news is often very wrong. Sometimes erroneous but given the number of errors, this seems unlikely and certainly unprofessional. Sometimes we’re led to conclusions along a biased interpretative path by the journalist, the editor or the publishers’ prejudices. Sometimes it’s more pervasive, such as the PR campaign of the US Senate’s recent $300 million allocation to encourage journalists to find “negative articles related to China’s Belt and Road Initiative” (BRI) causing some journalists to focus on rewards instead of ethics.
A representative of the Financial Times, one of the world’s most respected newspapers provided an interesting example in a tweet a few days ago. FT’s Global China Editor, James Kynge, no doubt in his personal capacity, showed his true colors. His obvious belief that the Communist Party of China (CPC), never tells the truth, is exposed by the words “as ever…”, indicating that he doesn’t believe anything China has previously officially reported. He then goes on to use an interpretation of part of a speech given by Xi Jinping where the words “头破血流” (Tóupòxiěliú) were used.
These words can be variously translated. Google translates them as “battered”, the Chinese historical novel Journey to the West translated to English in 1983 by Anthony C Yu, for dramatic effect described, as: “blood gushing out and their heads split open”. The official CPC translation described them as a collision course as in: “…anyone who would attempt to do so (bully China) will find themselves on a collision course with a great wall of steel.”
Whatever the interpretation, when taken in context with the rest of the speech where President XI spoke of: “Peace, concord, and harmony…” then (China…) “does not carry aggressive or hegemonic traits in its genes”, as well as “we will remain committed to promoting peace” it’s quite apparent that the meaning is not an “over-dramatised” interpretation of a threat but of peaceful progress into the future. While, at the same time, letting the world know that the country which was bullied in the past has come of age and will no longer be victimised. There’s nothing sinister or threatening in this, unless you’re the bully!
STRAIGHT LINE LOGIC 