香港大火成中共掌控香港能力，嚴峻考驗；白紙運動三周年，多地民眾被警方約談；遼寧漁船韓國傾覆事件內情；中共2027年武統台灣？ 賴清德宣布守護方案...

Shocking! Bizarre details emerge before the Hong Kong University fire; M...

Chinese netizens launch a collective counterattack at account bans

 Direct translation

The more ruthless the account bans, the fiercer the resistance! Chinese netizens launch a collective counterattack

- Suspected involvement in the Yu Menglong incident: A large number of Weibo user accounts have been banned or suspended

Reporter : Wang Duruo / Editor : Fang Xun / https://www.aboluowang.com/2025/1126/2311087.html

Recently, a large number of Chinese netizens have collectively complained that their Weibo accounts were suddenly and uniformly banned without warning, without any violation, and without any appeal channel. Netizens generally suspect that this "indiscriminate account annihilation" is directly related to the Yu Menglong death incident and the Yunnan "wild child" incident.

On the 24th, Xiaohongshu was instantly flooded with complaints: "Accounts that have been around for over ten years are being banned just like that," "Membership fees were wasted," "No chance to appeal at all." Many people discovered that as long as they liked, commented on, or reposted anything related to Yu Menglong, even if it was two months ago, or even if the account had been inactive for a long time, it was precisely targeted and eliminated by big data. "It's like being wiped out in one fell swoop," "Completely disgusting," netizens angrily cursed.

Similar public outrage erupted on Zhihu, with a large number of users being banned for several days in a row, yet no violation of the 65 rules could be found. "This isn't management, this is silencing." Some angrily denounced: "Even ten-year verified accounts have been shut down, and they're still writing 'politically related' stuff? It's laughable."

Even more shocking is that several influential figures with millions of followers—Song Zude, Wolf Uncle, Luban, etc.—were also completely wiped out for supporting Yu Menglong. "No followers, no memberships, and no refunds."

Netizens unanimously concluded:

"The more they censor, the more guilty they seem."

"The crazy account bans show they're scared."

Following this was an unprecedented wave of resistance:

"Give it one star in the app store!"

"Go and sell its stock!"

"The more they censor, the more we should speak out!"

"Those who silenced them will pay the price!"

"Wait for the backlash!"

Public opinion is retaliating, and this time, countless ordinary people are standing up together.

Yu Menglong case suspect Xin Qi bears a striking resemblance to Xi Yuanping

 Direct translation

Old photos of Yu Menglong case suspect "Xin Qi" bear a striking resemblance to Xi Yuanping! Li Muyang suspected: the relationship is not simple

Editor : Zhao Li / Source : Newtalk / https://www.aboluowang.com/2025/1127/2311586.html / Image : Photos of Xin Qi before his plastic surgery have surfaced. Image: Taken from YouTube video "News Highlights by Li Muyang"

The case of Yu Menglong's fall from a building has dragged on for over 70 days, with netizens pointing the finger at a "gathering of 17 people" he attended before his death. In response, internet celebrity Li Muyang pointed out that while most of the named suspects have responded to some extent, Xin Qi is the exception. Regardless of the external criticism, he has remained silent throughout. Furthermore, comparisons have revealed a striking resemblance between Xin Qi and Xi Yuanping before his plastic surgery, and Xin Qi's name is even more striking than Xi Jinping's mother's, "Qi Xin," read backwards. Therefore, Li Muyang suspects that the relationship between Xin Qi and Xi Yuanping is not innocent.

Conspiracy theories surrounding Yu Menglong's case have gone viral online, and the cause of his death remains shrouded in mystery. Netizens have pointed the finger at a "gathering of 17 people" he attended before his death, including director Xin Qi, director Cheng Qingsong, screenwriter Jiguangguang, director Fang Li, actress Song Yiren, actress Tian Hairong, and singer Jiao Maiqi. In response, internet celebrity Li Muyang pointed out on his YouTube channel "News Highlights Li Muyang" that while most of the named suspects have shown some reaction, Xin Qi is an exception. Regardless of the external criticism, he has remained completely silent. Therefore, he stated, "His composure is probably due to a powerful backer, and a very powerful one at that."

Recently, netizens shared a photo of Xi Zhongxun and his wife, along with four other Xi brothers, noting a striking resemblance between Xin Qi and Xi Yuanping before his alleged plastic surgery. Li Muyang consulted various AIs, and ChatGPT responded that the overall similarity between the two is "moderately high," especially in facial lines and proportions, eyebrow and eye features, and the shape of their smiles.

Grok explicitly stated that the similarity was "very high," noting the striking resemblance in face shape, nose, eyes, eyebrows, lips, philtrum, and overall bone structure—a similarity of "85% to 90% or more." Therefore, Grok concluded that it is highly likely the same person, with photos taken at different ages, or that they are very closely related direct relatives, such as father and son.

Image : Recently, netizens shared a photo of Xi Zhongxun and his wife, along with a group photo of the Xi brothers. (Source: YouTube video "News Highlights by Li Muyang")

Furthermore, Li Muyang pointed out that, according to his intelligence, Xi Jinping's mother's name was Qi Xin, which is Xin Qi's name reversed. This led him to suspect, "Is there a connection between the two? Could it be that Xi Yuanping reversed Qi Xin's name to name his illegitimate child?" He further suggested that Xin Qi's situation is similar to the "Yan'an Seed Project" initiated by Deng Xiaoping, which aimed to preserve the DNA of seven leaders from the Yan'an period, hoping that their descendants would inherit the DNA regardless of whether the CCP existed in the future.

Image : Xi Jinping's mother's name is Qi Xin, which is Xin Qi's name reversed. (Image: Taken from YouTube video "News Highlights by Li Muyang")

Self-media commentator Zhai Shanying stated that the CCP selected nearly 200 women to produce offspring for them. These offspring are unaware of their lineage because CCP leaders fear potential retribution. Therefore, these hidden descendants are required to live in a closed environment, with limited contact with the outside world. After being raised, they are subjected to clandestine activities, supported by substantial hidden wealth provided by the CCP.

Xin Qi became a deputy director-level official at 18 and a deputy ministerial-level official at 28. Li Muyang frankly stated, "Such a bizarre resume is beyond the reach of ordinary families." Independent commentator Cai Shenkun pointed out that insiders know Xin Qi has a CCP background. Another insider revealed, "That man is known in investment circles. He has a sinister appearance, wears glasses, has a bluish-white complexion, likes to manipulate things behind the scenes, uses virtual numbers for phone calls, and knows CCTV leaders. He also has a black market supply chain behind him, laundering money abroad through banks. Bank leaders also know who he is because they know him before transferring money abroad; without notification, the money can't be transferred out."

Therefore, Li Muyang stated that the many bizarre events that ordinary people would never dare to imagine accumulated in Xin Qi's life, highlighting his extraordinary background. "Based on the comprehensive analysis, has the mystery of finding Xin Qi's father been solved?"

Image : An insider revealed, "That man is known in the investment circle. He has a sinister appearance, wears glasses, and has a pale complexion. He likes to manipulate things behind the scenes, uses virtual numbers for phone calls, and knows leaders at CCTV. He also has a black market supply chain behind him, laundering money abroad through banks. The bank's leadership knows who he is because they know him before transferring money overseas; they can't transfer money without notifying him." (Image: Taken from YouTube video "News Focus Li Muyang")

StayGate Pictures : Vietravel Airlines ticketing office in Ho Chi Minh City

 Photo copyright by : Gan Yung Chyan, KUCINTA SETIA

Xi Jinping makes a disastrous move! He's ruined himself! Lai Ching-te's ...

If something happens to Taiwan, it means something happens to the United States

 Direct translation

Miles Yu : If something happens to Taiwan, it means something happens to the United States

Commentator : Miles Yu / Editor: Li Guangsong / https://www.aboluowang.com/2025/1126/2310975.html / Image : Aboluowang

In her recent policy statement, Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi articulated a significant position on the Taiwan issue, one that stands in stark contrast to the prevailing global narrative regarding tensions across the Taiwan Strait.

While most of the world remains trapped in the discourse framework relentlessly promoted by Beijing, portraying Taiwan as a Chinese "internal affair," a "unification vs. independence" issue, and therefore outside the scope of international concern, Ms. Takaichi completely circumvents this premise.

Instead, she grounds Japan's position in the concrete geographical and strategic realities of Japan's security environment, rather than in abstract sovereignty issues or historical claims. In doing so, she provides a model for democracies, particularly the United States, to rethink their own interests in Taiwan's future.

Beijing's preferred narrative—that Taiwan "belongs to China" and other countries should remain neutral—has long influenced global discourse, even among democracies skeptical of China's intentions.

This framework subtly compels the international community to view Taiwan's security issue from a Chinese nationalist perspective, rather than from the perspective of Indo-Pacific geopolitical balance. The result is a timid diplomatic vocabulary: countries express "opposition to unilateral changes to the status quo," "support for a peaceful resolution," or "maintaining strategic ambiguity," but rarely clearly explain what Taiwan's fate means for their own national security.

Ms. Takaichi, however, cuts to the chase. She does not waste time arguing about China's historical claims or Taiwan's political status, but focuses with remarkable clarity on the implications for Japan. She points out that Taiwan is less than seventy miles from Yonaguni Island, Japan. Japan's key shipping lanes, energy transport routes, and defense perimeter all directly intersect with Taiwan's airspace and waters. A Taiwan controlled by China would not only alter the balance of power in East Asia but would also allow the People's Liberation Army to directly pressure Japan's southern flank, threaten the Ryukyu Islands, restrict Japan's maritime routes, and deeply extend Beijing's anti-access/area denial capabilities into the Western Pacific.

In other words, if Taiwan falls, Japan's security will collapse.

This argument is starkly different from common pro-Taiwan justifications based on morality or values. It is not out of sympathy for a thriving democracy under threat—though Japan certainly does possess such sympathy; nor is it to defend "international norms"—though Tokyo also values ​​them highly. Instead, Sanae Takaichi explicitly asserts: defending Taiwan is defending Japan. These interests are direct, concrete, and unambiguously tied to Japan's national interests.

This repositioning has two important implications. First, it avoids falling into the rhetoric traps favored by Beijing, such as "Chinese sovereignty" or "unification versus Taiwan independence," which are rhetorical traps. Once foreign governments accept that the Taiwan issue is "essentially a matter of Chinese ownership," all subsequent discourse becomes passive, limited, or weakened.

Second, it provides other democracies with a clear and frank template for articulating their own interests. Washington, in particular, should pay close attention.

The United States' long-standing policy toward Taiwan has emphasized deterrence, democracy, and maintaining peace and stability. These principles are important but they fail to fully express the specific national interests facing the United States.

Like Japan, if Taiwan falls under Beijing's control, the United States' strategic environment and its own national interests will be fundamentally altered. Beyond the prospect of Taiwan's global semiconductor manufacturing leadership falling into the hands of communist China—a near-certain blow to the U.S. economy—a PLA-controlled Taiwan would also tear apart the First Island Chain, allowing China unimpeded military projection into the Central Pacific.

This would also give China control of the region's last strategic chokepoint, linking its claims in the East China Sea with its ambitions in the South China Sea, effectively placing the entire Western Pacific under Beijing's control.

It would also undermine U.S. alliances with Japan and the Philippines, threaten Guam, and destroy the U.S.'s credibility as the guarantor of security in the Asia-Pacific.

Furthermore, it would accelerate the collapse of democratic confidence in the region and encourage the expansion of other authoritarian powers. Crucially, it would enable Beijing to challenge U.S. air and sea superiority in a way that directly impacts U.S. economic and security interests, with effects lasting for decades.

However, Washington continues to address the Taiwan issue primarily in rhetoric of supporting democracy or opposing coercion. While these goals are commendable, they are far from sufficient to mobilize sustained national will.

What the United States needs is the same strategic clarity as Sanae Takaichi: defending Taiwan is not only not Taiwan's own problem, nor even primarily a problem belonging to China, but a matter of U.S. interests that will immediately impact U.S. security. By viewing Taiwan as a matter of self-interest, rather than an altruistic moral handout, Washington can more effectively explain Taiwan's importance to itself and its allies.

This is not merely about protecting a democracy, nor simply about avoiding conflict, but about preventing a drastic shift in the global balance of power and preventing the United States from becoming less secure, less influential, and less able to shape the international order.

Therefore, Takaichi's argument not only reminds Japan of its own geopolitical vulnerability but also extends a strategic invitation to the United States: to view Taiwan with a more realistic perspective.

Taiwan's defense is in the national interests of both Japan and the United States. Beijing wants the world to continue debating Taiwan's "status."

Takaichi suggests that democracies should focus on their own interests, their own geography, and their own security. Washington should heed this advice. Defending Taiwan, in its most pragmatic and far-reaching sense, is defending America's own future.