The Chinese Communist Party is Expanding it’s International Surveillance Via Social Media.

As uncovered by hundreds of Chinese bidding documents, contracts, and company filings recently uncovered by a media outlet, China is now expanding its internal Internet-data surveillance network by using Western social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter to gather information on foreign targets.

This information will let the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) government agencies, military, and police authorities better understand who they are targeting outside of China.

According to a Washington Post story, China uses public opinion analysis technologies developed in the previous ten years as surveillance for its residents and as a trigger to alert officials about any politically sensitive things posted online. According to an analysis of bidding documents and contracts for over 300 Chinese government projects since 2020, the program was originally designed for China’s local Internet users and media, but it appears that the CCP is aiming to spread its use overseas.

According to the documents, the communist government has been ordering software tailored to collect data on foreign targets from Western social media platforms like Twitter and Facebook. The documents are accessible to the general public via domestic government bidding platforms.

These documents show that state media, propaganda departments, police, military, and cyber regulators are now purchasing newer or more advanced data collection technologies.

A $320,000 Chinese official media software program that scans Twitter and Facebook to develop a database of foreign journalists and academics is one example. Another is a $216,000 Beijing police intelligence program that monitors Western conversations over Hong Kong and Taiwan.

These initiatives help them “better understand the underground network of anti-China personnel,” according to a Beijing-based analyst who talked to the Post on the condition of anonymity and works for a division that reports to China’s Central Propaganda Department. He revealed that his team was once given the task of compiling data on how critical talk about China’s senior leadership spreads on Twitter. Academics, politicians, and journalists were all mentioned in the report.

“They are now reorienting part of that effort outward, and I think that’s frankly terrifying, looking at the sheer numbers and sheer scale that this has taken inside China,” said Mareike Ohlberg, a researcher at the German Marshall Fund who specializes on China’s internal public opinion network.

“It really shows that they now feel it’s their responsibility to defend China overseas and fight the public opinion war overseas.” She added.

It’s unknown how much Beijing spends on official public opinion monitoring systems, but the state-run China Daily newspaper reported in 2014 that there were over 2 million public opinion analysts employed at the time. The People’s Daily, another state-owned publication, said in 2018 that the sector was worth “tens of billions of yuan,” or billions of dollars, and was increasing at a rate of up to 50% each year.

You can surely expect to be on a list no matter what your political or social stances are in the near future. It’s just interesting to see China industrializing data by whatever means necessary. They are tapping into the various back doors of consumerism to infiltrate economic stability, and social media platforms to analyze the flow of dissent. We’d have to be fools to assume that the United States doesn’t have measures in place identical to that of China’s internet data surveillance programs. 1 Peter 4:12-14 says: “Beloved, do not be surprised at the fiery trial when it comes upon you to test you, as though something strange were happening to you. But rejoice insofar as you share Christ’s sufferings, that you may also rejoice and be glad when his glory is revealed. If you are insulted for the name of Christ, you are blessed, because the Spirit of glory and of God rests upon you.” Stay inquisitive in the word of God, and the world around you.

The non-FDA approved drug Ivermectin has become quite controversial since the outbreak in 2020. Multiple public figures have been scrutinized for their use of the drug to aid their COVID-19 symptoms. Interestingly enough, despite scrutiny the drug appears to have shown as effective against COVID-19 symptoms.

Joe Rogan contracted COVID-19 on or about September 1st, after conducting a stand up show. He then took to instagram to spread the news to his followers.

“So we threw the kitchen sink at it, all kinds of meds,” Rogan said, specifying he took a Z-Pak (aka the antibiotic azithromycin), prednisolone (a corticosteroid used to treat inflammation) and Ivermectin, which is a drug used to treat parasitic worms in horses.

The New York Times reported on Aug. 30 that Ivermectin has “repeatedly failed in clinical trials to help people infected with the coronavirus.”

If the New York Times is so sure of themselves, what do they have to say about Joe Rogan walking and talking today? or how about the 71 year old man Epoch Times wrote about today who made a full recovery after being administered ivermectin due to a court order that the hospital fought for their lives to disregard?

Sun Ng, 71, who was visiting the United States from Hong Kong to celebrate his granddaughter’s first birthday, became ill with COVID-19 and within days was close to death. He was hospitalized on Oct. 14 at Edward Hospital, in Naperville, Illinois, a part of the Edward-Elmhurst Health system. His condition worsened dramatically and he was intubated and placed on a ventilator a few days later.

Ng’s only child, Man Kwan Ng, who holds a doctorate in mechanical engineering, did her own research and decided her father should take ivermectin, which some medical doctors believe is effective against COVID-19 despite the FDA’s guidance to the contrary.

But against the daughter’s wishes, the hospital refused to administer ivermectin, and denied access to a physician willing to administer it.

The daughter went to court on her father’s behalf and on Nov. 1, Judge Paul M. Fullerton of the Circuit Court of DuPage County granted a temporary restraining order requiring the hospital to allow ivermectin to be given to the patient. The hospital refused to comply with the court order.

At a subsequent court hearing on Nov. 5, Fullerton said that one physician who testified described Sun Ng as “basically on his death bed,” with a mere 10 to 15 percent chance of survival.

Ivermectin can have minor side effects such as dizziness, itchy skin, and diarrhea at the dosage suggested for Ng, Fullerton said, but the “risks of these side effects are so minimal that Mr. Ng’s current situation outweighs that risk by one-hundredfold.”

The judge issued a preliminary injunction that day directing the hospital to “immediately allow … temporary emergency privileges” to Ng’s physician, Dr. Alan Bain, “solely to administer Ivermectin to this patient.”

The hospital resisted the order on Nov. 6 and 7, denying Bain access to his patient. The hospital claimed it couldn’t let Bain in because he was not vaccinated against COVID-19 and that its chief medical officer wasn’t available to “proctor” Bain administering ivermectin.

The daughter’s lawyers filed an emergency report with the court Nov. 8 and Fullerton heard from both sides. The judge admonished the hospital and restated that it must allow Bain inside over a period of 15 days to do his job. When the hospital filed a motion to stay the order, Fullerton denied it, again directing the facility to comply.

Apparently, the ivermectin worked and Sun Ng has recovered from COVID-19. He was discharged by the hospital on Nov. 27.

The US National library of Medicine posted a ‘Review of the Emerging Evidence Demonstrating the Efficacy of Ivermectin in the Prophylaxis and Treatment of COVID-19’. The conclusion of multiple studies conducted goes as follows:

Meta-analyses based on 18 randomized controlled treatment trials of ivermectin in COVID-19 have found large, statistically significant reductions in mortality, time to clinical recovery, and time to viral clearance. Furthermore, results from numerous controlled prophylaxis trials report significantly reduced risks of contracting COVID-19 with the regular use of ivermectin. Finally, the many examples of ivermectin distribution campaigns leading to rapid population-wide decreases in morbidity and mortality indicate that an oral agent effective in all phases of COVID-19 has been identified.

Clear distinctions have been made between ivermectin intended for animal use and human use. It seems that ivermectin for animal use is strongly recommended against due to adverse effects; However ivermectin for human use, appears to have significant effect on COVID-19 symptoms. With that being said, we all know why ivermectin is such a controversial topic.

It takes money out of the pockets of big pharma during a time in which society is expected to turn to them with no questions asked. As they should of expected, much of humanity has a growing distrust for multi-billion dollar institutions such as these. Especially since there has been very limited transparency about the origin of the virus. We already know the origin, they simply want to avoid explanation and convince you to get vaccinated. It’s safe to say that most freedom loving Americans are watching closely as they trick over half of society into backing their agenda.