公民会-Assembly of Citizens Official

公民成长自由谈第一期 youtu.be/NcguCpf8Q6w?si… via @YouTube

本期节目已经开始了，欢迎大家大家积极参加！ x.com/a4citizens/sta…

反对 #躺平 ，我想姓赵！ 😎 匿名投稿

#公民成长自由谈 的第二期节目还有不到二十四小时就开始了，希望大家积极踊跃参加讨论。本期我们将以加拿大为例介绍当代公民参与公共生活的过程，让我们一起学习如何真正践行自己的权利！ 时间：周六（5月2日）美东时间上午10:30 地点：推特（X）语音空间，链接如下。 twitter.com/i/spaces/1yxBe…

大水冲了龙王庙

EXCLUSIVE: A Chinese Group Facing Questions Over Foreign Influence Is Now Fundraising in Canada Tomorrow in Scarborough, a group called CUAME — Canadians United Against Modern Exclusion — is throwing a fundraising gala at Casa Deluz Banquet Hall. Tickets run $188 a head, $1,880 for a table of ten, $5,000 for a VIP table. The event has already been picked up by at least two Chinese-language media outlets. One report comes from a Toronto-based correspondent affiliated with Chinese Communist Party's Central Television, while another appears on a news website that features columns by Michael Chan, a Canadian politician often described as China-friendly, as well as coverage of community organizations such as the Chinese Canadian Alliance for the Promotion of Peaceful Reunification of China (Toronto Area), which has been described as part of a broader united front or pro-Beijing network, and related events. On paper, it looks like any other community fundraiser. It’s also the kind of event a group that may have links to foreign governments can use to build networks, win access, and expand its footprint in Canada. CUAME was launched last year by a number of well-known figures in the Chinese Canadian community. It pitches itself as a civil liberties shop pushing back against “foreign interference hysteria,” “national security overreach,” and fear of “the other.” But once you start reading what the group actually publishes — and look at who’s behind it — the pitch starts to wobble. Among the figures reportedly tied to CUAME are Senator Yuen Pau Woo and former senator Victor Oh, both long viewed by critics as among the most Beijing-friendly voices in Canadian politics, alongside former MP Paul Chiang, who stepped down after a controversy over remarks related to China. Read their public statements side by side and a pattern emerges: a lot of the arguments line up neatly with talking points you’d recognize from China-related policy debates in Canada. That isn’t proof of coordination. But it’s a pattern worth asking about. CUAME’s central pitch is straightforward. Canada, the group argues, isn’t really dealing with foreign interference — it’s dealing with “modern exclusion.” People are being unfairly targeted, the argument goes, just for having “benign ties” to foreign entities. Canada does have a real history of discrimination, from the Chinese Exclusion Act to the internment of Japanese Canadians. That history matters. But it shouldn’t be used to blur a different question: how does a country deal with covert or undisclosed political activity tied to foreign actors? That distinction is the whole game. Canada’s foreign interference rules are about transparency, not identity. They’re aimed at undisclosed political activity linked to foreign governments — not at people because of where they come from. When every conversation gets reframed as Sinophobia or exclusion, it gets harder to ask basic questions without getting branded a bigot for asking them. And that’s where the deeper issue sits. Influence today is rarely loud or obvious. More often it’s about shaping how a debate gets talked about — which words people reach for, what becomes uncomfortable to question. Push the conversation off “foreign interference” and onto “exclusion,” and you’re not just joining the debate. You’re rewriting its terms. CUAME’s own report leans heavily on historical injustice — racism against Black Canadians, Indigenous communities, and Muslims, particularly after 9/11. These are serious histories that deserve serious engagement on their own merits. But mapping them directly onto today’s national security debate isn’t a neutral move. It’s a rhetorical pivot, and a powerful one. There’s a well-documented pattern in how foreign governments — China most prominently — try to shape political outcomes outside their borders. Analysts and official reports have repeatedly described the use of community organizations, business associations, and cultural groups to do outreach, cultivate political relationships, and steer public debate around elections and policy. That work isn’t always direct, and it isn’t always visible. It often runs through narratives, networks, and advocacy that look completely independent on the surface but track closely with the interests of a foreign state. Which is exactly why transparency matters. Set against that backdrop, CUAME’s framing — and the network it’s building — raises real questions. Recasting foreign interference as “modern exclusion” is a powerful rhetorical move on its own. Building the donor base and political proximity that a $188-a-head gala generates is another kind of move entirely. CUAME has also brought one or two Muslim and Iranian participants into its public-facing roster, which lets the group present itself as a broader coalition of minority communities defending shared interests. That framing runs into trouble pretty quickly. Concerns about the presence and activities of actors linked to the Iranian regime, including the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, have already produced real unease, and real opposition, inside parts of the Iranian Canadian community. Many of those voices are themselves calling for stronger safeguards against foreign state influence. That’s the contradiction. CUAME frames the issue as exclusion and fear of the other. Voices from inside the very communities it claims to speak for are raising the opposite concern: that foreign state influence is bleeding into Canada’s democratic space, and that the country isn’t paying enough attention. Against that, CUAME’s claim to broadly represent minority communities and their interests gets harder to square with what those communities actually sound like. One last detail worth noting: the venue for this fundraiser, Casa Deluz Banquet Hall, has also served as a regular location for Chinese consulate events, including Communist China's National Day receptions.

@ChinaCongress 这个“必须”二字是否辩题本身就不太公平？议题设置也会影响辩论结果。 建议改成“是否推荐民运举起/民运举起中华民国旗帜有哪些利弊”

本周推特空间主题： 民运必须举起中华民国这面旗帜吗？ 正方： 阮杰 澳大利亚“中华民国大陆政府”组织创办人 杨纯华 高级经济师，中国议会澳大利亚选区召集人 反方： 孙诚 知名历史学者，法律学者，联邦分治派倡导者 大力 say 油管博主 洛杉矶时间 5月2日（周六）8：00 pm x.com/i/spaces/1mgpa…

#堂堂正正做公民 让志永和家喜的理念继续在海外发扬光大！感谢台湾中央社的报道🙏！ cna.com.tw/news/acn/20260… 不仅要堂堂正正做公民，还要快快乐乐，健健康康做公民。我知故我快乐，我知行合一，所以坦坦荡荡，健健康康！

#堂堂正正做公民 由我机构与加拿大公民会联合举办的 #公民成长自由谈 第二期推特空间节目 #加拿大专题 将于本周六（5月2日）美东时间上午10:30 开始进行，诚挚欢迎各位网友前来参与！也欢迎您转发分享到您的朋友圈，邀请更多朋友一同参加！ 我们衷心感谢上月来参加我们推特空间第一期节目的所有公民！感谢大家给予我们的鼓励和支持，意见和建议！根据大家的反馈，我们调整了节目的时长：从一个小时延长到一个半小时，希望带来更充实深入的交流！ 在上期节目中，三位主讲嘉宾结合自身的经历，探讨了公民、人民与居民的权利和义务，公民权利与人权的区别，当前中国公民的素养与参政议政的现状，以及我们这个项目希望达成的自我教育，相互教育，共同成长的目标等。 从这一期节目开始，我们将以加拿大的政治制度为起点，按国别介绍当代主要民主政治体制的结构和特点，分享公民参与公共生活，参与政治活动的方式和体会等，包括理解各国时政所需的基础常识，例如当前主要党派、如何参与助选、投票时间及投票流程等。 让我们一同来思考：当我们拥有投票权与选举权时，应如何选择适合中国未来发展的政治体制？是总统制、议会制，还是半总统制？ 让我们一起了解政治，关心政治，共同感受民主与自由的价值与喜悦。 让我们一起切磋学习，共同成长！ 让我们一起： #堂堂正正做公民 #快快乐乐做公民 #健健康康做公民 @luoshch @CitizensAssemb

链接随后马上发布

说真的我离开中国后很快乐的一点是终于不用忍受公共场所的二手烟了，想起以前肖美丽反二手烟被网暴攻击炸号……我就感觉美国的空气实在是香甜😂

【中共数字跨国镇压再升级】来自加拿大的公民实验室（Citizen Lab）近日发布重磅报告《荒诞故事》（Tall Tales），深入揭露了中国背景的行为者如何利用“身份冒充”与“叙事窃取”两大核心策略，对海外异议人士实施精准的数字跨国镇压。 这份报告通过追踪名为“GLITTER CARP”和“SEQUIN CARP”的两个行动组，还原了其针对维吾尔族、藏族活动家、台湾媒体组织、香港活动人士以及国际调查记者同盟（ICIJ）记者等的系统性攻击。这些行动不仅仅是简单的网络入侵，更是高度定制化的心理战与技术渗透。 在技术手段上，攻击者展现了极高的隐蔽性与欺骗性： 1. 深度社交工程与叙事伪造：攻击者不仅冒充知名技术公司发送安全警报，还精心编造了诸如“白斌腐败外逃”等虚构故事，为钓鱼邮件构建极其逼真的背景，利用受害者的心理防线实施突破。 2. OAuth 权限窃取：这是其最具威胁的手段之一。通过诱导目标授予邮件账户的第三方访问权限，攻击者可以彻底绕过多因素认证（MFA）和密码修改，实现对目标邮箱的长期静默监控与数据外传。 3. 数字追踪与反侦察：邮件中嵌入的追踪像素能实时反馈目标的地理位置与设备信息；同时，其恶意网页采用了复杂的混淆代码和反分析技术，专门针对安全研究人员的检测。 报告明确指出，这些攻击活动与中国政府的情报优先级高度契合。证据显示，这些操作往往外包给国内的私人网络安全承包商，这种“公私合营”的模式不仅为官方提供了“合理推诿”的空间，还极大地扩展了其数字镇压的全球边界。 这种数字镇压的深远危害在于，它不仅窃取了敏感信息，更从根本上破坏了公民社会内部的信任基础，迫使调查记者与活动人士陷入自我审查的恐惧之中。 ​报告原文链接👇 citizenlab.ca/research/how-c…

大外宣缝纫机踩多了几年没上网

意共是世间最蠢最暴力和最贱的群体，下次大家遇到它们可以放首以色列国歌给它们治疗一下。 （乌克兰歌不好使，它们不太听得懂）

一边是杨景媛美美读博 一边是董志民铁链锁人 这些抽象事情的根源并不来自于性别，而是来自于共产党的社会治理失败，将矛转嫁到性别问题上。 引导两性之间互相仇恨就可以使共产党美美隐身： 集美们会认为是“蝻人”压迫了自己，不是共产党扭曲而不公的社会。 bro们会觉得是小仙女败坏了社会风气，寻求特权压榨男性，而不是共产党系统性的男性剥削。 而习近平稳坐钓鱼台看着男拳女拳，脸都要笑烂了。 群众斗群众，其乐无穷！

遏制共产势力，明智之举。保护台湾不受领土侵犯，关乎正义良知。

守着茅厕打苍蝇，毫无用处。 一个腐败的体系，从降生之日起便注定会充满血腥与贪婪。一群山匪缔造的政权，之后只能是换了一种姿势盗抢。

#青年视角 第六期【别磨叽，说说普通人咋当反对派？】 1、什么是“反对派”？什么是“#反动派”？ 2、#反对派 和 #消耗型选手（自我消耗和对外消耗）间有什么区别？ 我们期待听到你的声音与观点。 时间：2026年4月25日 星期六 12:00（美东） 地点：#公民抵抗 @gmdkxh语音空间 twitter.com/i/spaces/1mxPa…

真的笑死了，第一次见到用通缉令头像做活动海报的😂 朝廷钦点的要犯啊！