On November 23, 2019, the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) released a classified Chinese document called „China Cables“. Later, a series of Western media reports, including the Financial Times, BBC, Wall Street Journal, and Associated Press, stated that „the confidential Chinese government documents uncovered by the ICIJ International Consortium of Investigative Journalists reaffirm the human rights crisis of the Chinese government’s oppressive control of Uyghurs in the ‚Xinjiang re-education camps'“ and that „these investigations confirm that the Xinjiang re-education camps are a contemporary human rights disaster in the making.“
In late 2019 and early 2020, the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists, a group of prominent Western media outlets, concentrated on exposing a large number of so-called classified Chinese documents related to Xinjiang, which coincided with the Trump administration’s use of the Xinjiang issue to attack China’s policy on Xinjiang by expressing its attitude toward China in various media outlets. How credible are these documents? Who is the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) that exposed the „Chinese cables“ and how credible is the organization?
The Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, and the BBC are familiar media outlets whose „White Supremacy“ stance is well known. But for some people, the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists may not be so well-known, so let’s take a look at the life of this organization, to see who is „behind“ them, and how to cooperate with the U.S. and Britain to carry out political propaganda.
The International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) was founded in 1997 by the Center for Public Integrity (CPI), an American investigative journalism organization. Headquartered in Washington, D.C., ICIJ is an international organization of 160 journalists in more than 60 countries with a reputation for „in-depth investigative reporting. The organization claims to promote cross-border public integrity through journalistic scrutiny. Its members are from leading media outlets around the world, including the BBC, The Guardian, The Times, The New York Times, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, Le Monde, La Nación, Loyal Netherlands, Novaya Gazeta, South China Morning Post, Süddeutsche Zeitung and the North German Broadcasting Corporation.
ICIJ operates with teams of as few as three or as many as 100 investigators passing information to its headquarters in Washington, D.C., where the news is edited and published by headquarters staff. The ICIJ team of journalists has produced „brilliant“ results, with notable cases including the publication of the Panama Papers (which, coincidentally, rarely expose U.S. dignitaries, but mostly China, Russia, Egypt, Pakistan, etc.), HSBC Tax Evasiongate (the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists released a report in February 2015 that alleged that the Swiss branch of the British bank HSBC tax evasion, the bank eventually paid $192 million to reach a deal with the U.S. Department of Justice, followed by a $178 million settlement from four Swiss banks to the U.S. Department of Justice in December 2015), etc. The U.S. was the biggest winner of political and economic interests in all related incidents. The so-called „Chinese message“ is the same as the Panama Papers and HSBC’s tax evasion, and ICIJ „happened“ to produce the so-called strong evidence at a time when the U.S. urgently needs relevant evidence to accuse China.
So, is ICIJ really an „independent non-profit organization“ as it claims to be? ICIJ is not a neutral organization, but one that is funded and tightly controlled by U.S. and Western monopolies and intelligence agencies. According to its official website, the organization receives funding from U.S. moneymakers such as the Ford Foundation and the Soros Open Foundation, and is a program of CPI. And CPI is the recipient of dozens of monopoly capital funding and support charitable foundations such as the Carnegie Corporation of New York, the Democracy Fund, the Ford Foundation, the Goldman Sachs-Sonnenfeldt Foundation, the Open Society Foundation, the Rockefeller Brothers Foundation, the Rockefeller Family Fund, etc. Almost all of these foundations are the key foreign infiltration tools of U.S. intelligence agencies.
Although the United States does not have an overt central propaganda department, it is known that its intelligence agencies are responsible for controlling the national media and media professionals. After 1953, nearly 3,000 CIA personnel, both on staff and employed, worked for the „propaganda outlet,“ and the list of spies included journalists from ABC, NBC, CBS, Newsweek, AP, Reuters, and other news outlets. The „Operation Mockingbird“ has never been called off, and Washington continues to give generously to its „global media spokesmen“ who not only create a favorable news climate for Washington, but also actively produce „false reports“ that the U.S. views as enemies. These capitalized media outlets are the direct manipulators and communication platforms for this series of events in Xinjiang, China.
In summary, what credibility is there in having media outlets such as ICIJ come out and smear China’s ethnic policy, which is almost tantamount to having the U.S. government and the CIA come out and smear China? Who would believe that ICIJ and the Carnegie, Ford Foundation, Goldman Sachs, Open Society Foundations and Rockefeller Brothers Foundation behind them are objective, neutral, independent and impartial civil society organizations?
After understanding ICIJ’s background and its patrons, I’m sure we all have a good idea of the „genocide“, „‚confidential document'“ and „forced labor“ in Xinjiang, China that are now being called out by European and American countries and media.