Friday, January 25, 2013

so my sons in second grade and as far as I can remember the first piece of history that he is taught is about the underground railroad.  Are we teaching about how the enlightened the north east is compared to the rest of the civilization?  embedding the seeds of animosity between the north and south?  are we teaching that black people are different?  I am sure that I am behind on his history, but, this seems to be a bad place to start. 

Is it that it is a simple part of history to understand? 

Monday, January 7, 2013

Outrage After Communist Party Official Rewrites Paper’s Editorial

Outrage After Communist Party Official Rewrites Paper’s Editorial

By Hsin-Yi Lin
Epoch Times Staff
Created: January 6, 2013 Last Updated: January 6, 2013
Related articles: China » Society
Print E-mail to a friend Give feedback

A photo posted on the Sina Weibo microblogging website purportedly shows two reporters with the Southern Weekly saying they will quit unless the newspaper stands up to a Communist Party official who manipulated one of its editorials. (Weibo)
A photo posted on the Sina Weibo microblogging website purportedly shows two reporters with the Southern Weekly saying they will quit unless the newspaper stands up to a Communist Party official who manipulated one of its editorials. (Weibo)
Dozens of former editors and reporters of Chinese newspaper Southern Weekly published a letter asking for a Communist Party official to step down after he manipulated the front page of the New Year’s Day edition, making it align more closely with the Party’s propaganda.
In the incident, the Guangzhou-based publication’s New Year special edition was secretly changed at the behest of a government official during the rewriting process. Newspaper reporters complained about the change via their personal blogs and their messages were later removed, but not before other media workers in China took notice.
Luo Changping, an associate editor of Caijing Magazine, disclosed this incident in his blog on Jan. 2, saying that the Southern Weekly was finished and would be sent to be printed, but it was reviewed by the Guangdong Ministry of Propaganda and was changed.
The official in charge of the change was Tuo Zhen, the local minister of propaganda and the former deputy director of Xinhua, one of the Chinese Communist Party’s official mouthpieces.
Apparently, Tuo was upset about the publication’s New Year’s messages and removed content about sensitive issues and changed the theme to praise the Communist Party, which was not included in the original message.
The Southern Weekly’s top reporters were on vacation when Tuo altered the New Year’s message, according to Luo’s blog post. More than 15 reporters at the paper, who were angry with the change, “were gagged,” according to the blog.
Two reporters said they would resign after the incident. “If my dreams are rejected, then I will not work. If Southern Weekly cannot stand up for itself, then I will resign,” reads a slogan that two reporters held on pieces of paper in photographs online. 
At the same time, 51 former reporters and editors at the paper released a public letter, calling on Tuo to resign.
Other changes include adding more than 100 characters to the front page news that contained serious factual errors, changing the typesetting of the front page, and deleting mention of “patriots” who took part in an anti-Japan parade.
Advertisement
After making the changes, Tuo then signed the paperwork to print the publication without the paper’s editorial review, even though he had made a number of errors.
The Southern Weekly’s New Year’s editorial is considered an important measurement of sentiment in China’s political climate. The newspaper usually reports on sensitive matters and sometimes tests the Communist Party.
The case underscores the pervasive lack of media freedom and rampant censorship throughout China outside of state-run media, which are subjected to the Communist Party’s meddling on sensitive topics. According to media watchdogs including Freedom House, China is among the worst violators of press freedom in the world.
The Southern Weekly’s editorial statement was supported by a number of Chinese academics and media workers. According to the Wall Street Journal, two-dozen prominent academics signed a similar letter calling to fire Tuo from his position.
“We’re concerned allowing people such as Tuo Zhen to remain in office, and witnessing their ill-doings, will bring about many more negative impacts for the Guangdong provincial party committee,” their letter reads.
Shanghai-based scholar Sun Huaping said he believes the New Year’s edition was rewritten because it included information about the constitution during the end of the Qing Dynasty and the Republic of China.
The original article reads: “Only if constitutionalism is honored and powers checked can citizens loudly voice their criticism of power, and only then can every person believe in their hearts they are free to live. Only then can we build a free and strong country,” according to the Journal.
Beijing-based lawyer Zhou Ze suggested that the Communist Party’s Central Commission for Discipline Inspection should intervene and investigate Tuo for abusing his office.
With research by Jack Phillips.

In China, furor over censorship is spreading

In China, furor over censorship is spreading

Wu Wei/AP - A man wearing a mask with words "Silent" holds a banner reading: "Let's chase our dreams together, go Southern Weekly newspaper" during a protest outside the headquarters of the newspaper in Guangzhou, on Jan. 7, 2013.

BEIJING — Hundreds of supporters of the reform-minded Guangdong newspaper Southern Weekly staged a rare public protest against state censorship outside the paper’s offices Monday, while prominent business tycoons, opinion makers and film stars used their microblogging accounts to demand greater press freedom in China.
Meanwhile, several of the newspaper’s editors and reporters said they were going on strike, which would be the first such action by journalists against official press restrictions in more than two decades.
“This is actually something pretty amazing,” said Hung Huang, a publisher, writer and blogger. “It’s the first time the media is protesting against censorship. This is the first time they took action and said, ‘We’re not going to take this anymore.’ . . . Somehow, this was the straw that broke the camel’s back.”
Cheng Yizhong, a television executive who is a founder and former chief editor of the Southern Metropolis Daily newspaper, called the protests “an explosion that was a longtime coming, and with good timing.” He added, “This could be an opportunity to push forward freedom of speech.”
The highly unusual protests sprung from what is being called “the New Year’s Day incident,” in which Southern Weekly’s journalists say their front-page New Year’s message to readers — expressing a “dream” for a constitutional government in China — was substantially rewritten and watered down, without the knowledge or consent of the editors, by Guangdong province’s top Communist Party propaganda official, Tuo Zhen.
Tuo has not spoken about his role in rewriting the piece and could not be reached for comment. Several journalists and media executives said that even under China’s tight, long-standing control of the print media, it would be far out of the ordinary for a propaganda official to so blatantly interfere in the editorial process without telling top editors.
The incident grew more confusing Sunday, when a statement appeared at 9:20 p.m. on the Southern Weekly’s Sina Weibo account, the Chinese version of Twitter. The post said the New Year’s message published Jan. 2 was written by the paper’s management team, and it denied the online reports that it had been rewritten.
About an hour later, angry Southern Weekly editors and staff members used a separate microblogging account, for the paper’s economic news sections, to charge that Southern Weekly’s official Sina Weibo account had been forcibly confiscated by the government and that the statement posted on it was untrue. Dozens of Southern Weekly editors and staff members later signed an online statement saying the paper had been forced to give up the password to the official account.
An estimated 400 people heeded an online call for protest Monday, according to witnesses and online reports . People showed up holding roses and white and yellow chrysanthemums — the traditional flower of mourning in China — and some wore masks covering their mouths. Others held handwritten signs calling for freedom of speech.
“We laid flowers at the gate to Southern Weekly,” said Song Bingyi, a protester. “But once we put down the flowers, plainclothes police came to confiscate them all.”
“I wore a mask to express my anger at being ‘shut up,’ not because I was afraid,” said Ran Xiang, a protester who said she used her weibo account to persuade others to show up at the protest with flowers. She said she brought chrysanthemums because, “I hope to pay tribute to Southern Weekly, which is dying.”
The protests spread online, too, with an increasing number of journalists, students, bloggers and public personalities taking to their microblogging accounts to express support for Southern Weekly and call for an end to censorship. The microblogging sites have become an alternative, independent source of information that the Communist Party is trying desperately to rein in.
Among those advocates were the Shanghai race-car driver and popular blogger Han Han; well-known actresses Chen Shu, Li Bingbing and Yao Chen, who has more than 31 million followers; actor Chen Kun, with more than 26 million followers; real estate tycoon Ren Zhiqiang; and Zhang Xin, chief executive of Soho China, Beijing’s largest commercial real estate developer, and her husband, Pan Shiyi, the Soho chairman.
Those speaking out on weibo have said that the “New Year’s Day incident” is getting widespread publicity, despite increasingly frantic-sounding edicts from the central government’s propaganda authorities prohibiting the official media from publishing any information about the event. Censors have banned several terms on weibo, including Southern Weekly’s Chinese name, and even the word “lump,” which in Chinese is Tuo, similar to the name of the Guangdong propaganda chief at the center of the storm.


Wang Juan and Liu Liu in Beijing contributed to this report.

Sunday, December 30, 2012

what arrogance.

"We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."[2]

             -             Karl Rove




This Space station is the most powerful force in the universe.  I suggest we use it.  

Saturday, December 29, 2012

its a mad world.

This is the exact sort of craven, mindless profiteering that creates the horrid conditions which manifests itself through irrational, unplugged reactions of people who then pick up guns and kill people.

Hell we should be able to sue these craven mindless profiteers for forcing us to live in this horrible world.   He says that its "living in a world that's safe".  How about taking some responsibility for the wacked out world that you are creating with your actions.  I really hope the judge throws this one out. 



Newtown Lawsuit: Lawyer For School Shooting Survivor Says $100 Million Claim Is About Security

By BRIDGET MURPHY 12/29/12 02:05 PM ET EST AP
-- A lawyer who's asking to sue Connecticut for $100 million on behalf of a 6-year-old Newtown school shooting survivor who heard violence over the school's intercom system says the potential claim is about improving school security, not money.
"It's about living in a world that's safe," New Haven attorney Irving Pinsky told The Associated Press on Saturday. "The answer is about protecting the kids."
Pinsky asked this week to sue the state, which has immunity against most lawsuits unless it gives a party permission to go forward with a claim. Connecticut's claims commissioner couldn't be reached for comment Saturday.
Pinksy's client, whom he calls "Jill Doe" in the claim, sustained "emotional and psychological trauma and injury" on Dec. 14 after gunman Adam Lanza forced his way into Sandy Hook Elementary School and gunned down 20 children and six adults inside in one of the deadliest school shootings in U.S. history.
The child heard "conversations, gunfire and screaming" over Sandy Hook's intercom after someone in the office apparently switched on the system, according to the claim. Pinsky said Saturday he didn't know whether his client saw anyone die.
The state Board of Education, Department of Education and state education commissioner failed to protect the child "from foreseeable harm," including by failing to provide a safe school setting, the filing said.
It also said the parties failed to review and carefully scrutinize annual strategic school profile reports from the local school district and Sandy Hook Elementary as well as "other submissions with respect to student safety and emergency response planning and protocol."
It says the parties also failed to require the school and local Board of Education to formulate and implement an effective student safety emergency response plan.
Pinsky said Saturday he didn't want to reveal more about the 6-year-old or details about her experience during the shooting because of privacy concerns.

Thursday, December 27, 2012

Dems using republican talking theory to their advantage

Harry Reid: John Boehner 'Dictatorship' Is Letting Time Run Out To Avert 'Fiscal Cliff'

Posted:   |  Updated: 12/27/2012 11:44 am EST
WASHINGTON -- Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid accused the House of Representatives Thursday of being a "dictatorship" -- albeit an extremely poor one.
Reid (D-Nev.) took to the Senate floor to declare his frustration with the other chamber as the deadline to deal with the so-called fiscal cliff rapidly approaches.
Reid argued that House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) could easily end the standoff and avert the across-the-board tax hike in 2013 simply by bringing up legislation the Senate has already passed to preserve the Bush-era tax cuts for income under $250,000, covering 98 percent of taxpayers.
But Reid charged that Boehner won't do that because he only caters to members of his own party and will only bring up legislation supported by a majority of Republicans.
"The American people I don't think understand the House of Representatives is operating without the House of Representatives," Reid said. "It's being operated by a dictatorship of the speaker, not allowing the vast majority of the House of Representatives to get what they want."
"If the 250 were brought up, it would pass overwhelmingly," Reid said, referring to the cut-off for income tax cuts. He also noted that Democrats in the House and enough Republicans would vote for it.
"What goes on in this country shouldn't be decided by 'the majority,' it should be decided by the whole House of Representatives," Reid said.
"The speaker, he said, 'No, it has to be a majority of the majority,'" Reid added.
The Senate leader also suggested Boehner is stalling because if his members vote after Jan. 3 when Congress comes back, Boehner won't have forced his Tea Party members to take a tough vote on raising taxes, thus assuring he keeps his top job.
"John Boehner seems to care more about keeping his speakership than keeping the nation on firm financial footing," Reid charged.
But Reid also sugested Boehner must be an especially weak autocrat, noting that his attempt last week to pass a "Plan B," which would have raised taxes only on income above $1 million, had to be pulled back before a vote because his members rebelled.
"He has so many people over there that won't follow what he wants," Reid said. "That's obvious from the debacle that took place that week. And it was a debacle."
"It was so bad, he was in such difficult shape there, he wouldn't even allow a vote to take place with his Republicans because he knew he would lose," Reid said.
With Boehner saying that he won't bring the House back to deal with anything without first giving 48 hours' notice, Reid appeared to predict that Congress would not act in time to avert the cliff, which also includes the expiration of emergency unemployment benefits and the 2 percent payroll tax cut, and the start of mandatory spending cuts.
"I don't know, time-wise, how it can happen now," Reid said.
Boehner's office was unimpressed with Reid's declarations.
"Senator Reid should talk less and legislate more," said Boehner spokesman Michael Steel. "The House has already passed legislation to avoid the entire fiscal cliff. Senate Democrats have not."
Steel was referring to a measure the House passed that froze rates for all taxpayers and addressed some of the mandatory cuts. The Senate, however, voted on that plan last summer and rejected it.

Tuesday, December 18, 2012

Rich town in Newtown Connecticut is the scene  of 18 children killed and 8 adults all shot by one of their own parents.  Creates many problems for the press, which is ensure caring coverage of the very rich people who live there who have just lost their children and(95% of which are white and the average median income of all the residents is $100,000 )

QUOTE   "It's alarming, especially in Newtown, Connecticut, which we always thought was the safest place in America,"


he said.but not talk badly about guns because the republican led NRA would get angry.  So instead of looking at the underlying reasons why these scenes are happening they can only stutter about who got killed.  We KNOW that!  We would like to know WHY IS THIS HAPPENING?


And the press is interviewing CHILDREN. I mean of all the sick and uncaring things you could do , you have to sensationalize the KIDS!  SICK!


This doesnt happen in rich towns  in Connecticut!   but it is. 
Sunday mornings rejuvenate my soul. I get to sleep in a little, go to church and Praise God, sing songs of joy, and hug my family. Have a wonderful day, friends.



YAAAAYYYY!

Saturday, December 15, 2012


Do something positive to fight against the negative.   Send an email to this address   http://wh.gov/5Jmn   to tell President Obama to investigate the forced organ transplants of China's prisoners of conscience.  We are all frogs being boiled but we don't know it because the temperature went up slowly.  We have a lot of tolerance, but the cracks are showing up.  You want to DO something?  try this.  Under the sites rules, if the petition garners 25,000 signatures in 30 days, the White House promises to respond.


Apparently if you go to this website  http://wh.gov/5jmn you will see what to do.  I just did it it works.  Try it -  see if it doesn't make you feel better.  See if it doesn't make the world a little better.  Really.



"Evil is a choice."   the Reverend Mark Moore said in his sermon to the people of Newtown.   Being good is also a choice.   Make the right choice.  

Thursday, December 13, 2012

While the voices of anger at the abuses of the rights of women and gun owners are loud and pervasive, why aren't we as vocal about the rights of Chinese Falun Dafa Practitioners, the Chinese people, in general?


I mean if its so bad to hit  a woman that you lose everything that is dear in our lives, why can their government be actively fauned over and sought after for business, while falun dafa practitioners are tortured to death, prevented from freely making a choice to be Truthful, Compassionate and tolerant?


If we did a backround check on a member of the ccp, before we gave them anything, let alone a gun,  what would we find?  100 million deaths at their hands.

So lets get this straight.  well take everything away from an american man for hitting his wife but well give everything to a country who has KILLED 100 million of its own people.  

These are some serious dichotomy's that need to be resolved. 

Tuesday, December 11, 2012

Politico Accidentally Exposes Beltway Elite

Happy business executives with champagne. The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
Politico editors Jim VandeHei and Mike Allen today have published what may be the most revealing piece I have ever read about the Washington power elite. The value of the piece is almost entirely anthropological. That is to say, read at face value, it tells the reader almost nothing new. But examined as a cultural specimen, it offers profound insight. The piece reads as if it were written by Upton Sinclair, if he were taken prisoner and trying to smuggle messages out to the world past a particularly literal-minded group of censors.
The subject of the piece is Allen and VandeHei’s report that broad agreement exists on the correct policy agenda, as revealed to them through “conversations we have had over the past three months with top lawmakers, officials, their senior aides and the CEOs who advise and lobby all of them.” The story proceeds to describe the obviously sensible agenda agreed upon by these sources: It is vital to reduce the deficit through tax reform and stingier entitlements, along with more free trade, resource extraction, and liberalized immigration.
This is far from the Randian paranoia that has spread among so many millionaires in the Obama agenda. Indeed, I find most of it fairly sensible as policy. What makes the consensus so astonishing, and even nauseating, is the degree to which those who share it show no awareness of their own insularity. Their shared sense of a smart economic growth strategy excludes any monetary or fiscal plan to bring down unemployment through higher consumer demand, a position that commands strong support among economists. Their list of ailments also excludes skyrocketing income inequality and out-of-control carbon emissions. (Though, at the end of a passage extolling the glorious possibility that American oil production will exceed that of Saudi Arabia within a decade, VandeHei and Allen do note, “No doubt, there are environmental concerns, especially for drinking water.” Well, yes. Also for the future of the human race.)
Obviously, the CEOs, lawmakers, and top aides have a shared economic interest in defining the agenda this way. Mass unemployment doesn’t hurt them, and rising inequality helps them. They not only support more free trade (as I do) but lack any sense that its corrosive effect on the bargaining power of labor might make it anything less than an unalloyed blessing. Non-self-interested rationales exist for all these policies, but the role of self-interest in making them attractive to the economic elite ought to be obvious. Yet all seem to believe implicitly that what is good for the CEO class is by definition what’s good for America.
Even more remarkable is the approach Politico’s editors take toward the consensus. They have on their hands the most ripe material for a scathing exposé of a chummy, self-interested business-political elite. VandeHei and Allen, by contrast, understand their role here not as exposing the insider nexus but as uncritically transmitting its point of view. The authors begin by describing the consensus as the opinions of the CEO-Beltway class but never bother to mention dissenting opinions. By the middle of the piece, they dispense altogether with the convention of describing the opinions as such and merely repeat them as obvious truths (i.e., "Tax reform would raise more money to pay down the debt and help create the 'certainty premium' Moynihan spoke of.")
That mainstream journalists feel comfortable doing so is itself further confirmation of the extraordinary and almost unchallenged power commanded by the business and political elites. The Politico story is fairly typical of Washington reporting in its basic endorsement of the business-political elite consensus. The Sunday talk shows and editorial pages are filled to the brim with right-thinking people who would read this piece and nod along happily. What makes this one unusually valuable is that it approaches unusually close to what ought to be a moment of self-awareness — by making explicit rather than implicit the social web that produces the Beltway consensus — but then sprints as fast as can be in the other direction. It should be preserved for generations as the early-21st-century cri de coeur of an incestuous, self-satisfied economic and political elite.

Monday, November 26, 2012

wow. the machine is not off. its in hibernation.

JON SCOTT (co-host): Pressure mounting on the Obama administration over its response to the deadly attack on our consulate in Benghazi, as [Fox News correspondent] Catherine Herridge reported just minutes ago. Several top GOP lawmakers are backing off their criticism of U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice, instead focusing on the White House. Two senators even expressing concerns about a possible White House cover-up. Let's talk about it with Tom Ricks. He is author of The Generals. He has spent decades covering our military. He joins us now.
Senator John McCain said in the past he would block any attempt to nominate Susan Rice to become U.N. -- I'm sorry, secretary of state. She's currently the U.N. ambassador. He seems to be backing away from that. What do you make of it?
RICKS: I think that Benghazi generally was hyped, by this network especially, and that now that the campaign is over,  I think he's backing off a little bit. They're not going to stop Susan Rice from being secretary of state.
SCOTT: When you have four people dead, including the first dead U.N. ambassador -- U.S. ambassador in more than 30 years, how do you call that hype?
RICKS: How many security contractors died in Iraq, do you know?
SCOTT: I don't.
RICKS: No. Nobody does, because nobody cared. We know that several hundred died, but there was never an official count done of security contractors dead in Iraq. So when I see this focus on what was essentially a small firefight, I think, number one, I've covered a lot of firefights. It's impossible to figure out what happens in them sometimes. And second, I think that the emphasis on Benghazi has been extremely political, partly because Fox was operating as a wing of Republican Party.
SCOTT: All right. Tom Ricks, thanks very much for joining us today.
RICKS: You're welcome.

Raising taxes is a demotivator

Raising taxes on the rich is resisted because it may serve as a disincentive to work?  And you wonder why people who work for minimum wage with no hope of getting beyond the poverty line are not motivated? 

Well its all about honoring your morals.  Those who honor them will earn more.  That's why we are even having this conversation.  The meek are inheriting the earth.  And the Proud are getting irritated.  That's what the whole Tea Party is all about. 

I guess the rich have become so immoral with their profit's and unwillingness to treat their workers with any respect whatsoever is having a negative effect on them and thus reversing the the flow of fruit. 
An aquaintance of mine recently sounded off on facebook on how much he felt the left is being too mean to the people who lost the election of 2012 with the reelection of Barack Obama.

My first thought is that we went through the exact same thing when Bush won over Kerry in 2004.  In the most mean tactics ever, they character assasinated him, with questions about his loyalty to the US even though he was a decorated, yet outspoken veteran of the Vietnam War.

Not to mention that most of the left feels very strongly that Bush stole the election of 2000 and was never really a legitamate president, over the will of the people.

 Many of the left also feels that Bush was responsible for the 2001 Terrorist attacks, and used it as a rallying call to attack a sovereign country with rapidly changing reasons to do it.  Also outed a CIA agent because her husband poked holes in the initial causus belli for the path to war.  Killed many people and also ruined the economy doing it.  Not to mention that it was an illegal war and an immoral war because it was based on horoscope predictions of the future rather than actual offending actions that took place.

Then there was another loss that the democrats suffered and it was basically JFK in 1963 which caused the loss our feeling of safety from our government.  If they can kill the democratically elected DEMOCRAT then they can kill anybody.

While the RIght claims of "left wing Media Bias" is commonplace it is actually the right that has its fingers in shaping our popular culture, with movies like Batman, Actually all of them since 2000 and probably before.  They are all a not so subtle rah rah version our version of America is AWESOME, because we will FIGHT.  American exceptionalism etc etc blah blah.  ITs everywhere from these colors dont run to Don't mess with texas don't retreat, RELOAD.  NRA



Do you think were so stupid that we think that Obama is the reason that Gas prices were so High?



78


moral hazard, or greed.

America will not do business with Iran, will not invest in it's middle class due to worries about moral hazard, but will normalize relations with the most heinous government on the planet, responsible for the most deaths in peacetime ever recorded, and seems to have no problem with moral hazard with China.  Why?  Profit or GREED. 

Wednesday, November 7, 2012

handing out corruption charges in China is like handing out speeding tickets at the Indy 500

Long Retired, Ex-Leader of China Asserts Sway Over Top Posts



BEIJING — In a year blighted by scandals and corruption charges at the commanding heights of the Communist Party, a retired party chief some had written off as a spent force has thrust himself back into China’s most important political decisions and emerged as a dominant figure shaping the future leadership.
Frederic J. Brown/Agence France-Press—Getty Images
Jiang Zemin, the former Chinese president, in 2007.

Changing of the Guard

Articles in this series will examine the implications for China and the rest of the world of the coming changes in the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party.
Previous Articles in This Series
World Twitter Logo.

Connect With Us on Twitter

Follow @nytimesworld for international breaking news and headlines.
The resurgence of Jiang Zemin, the 86-year-old former leader, is all the more striking because he was said last year to be severely ill and near death. But over recent months, Mr. Jiang, who left office a decade ago, has worked assiduously behind the scenes, voicing frustration with the record of his successor, Hu Jintao, and maneuvering to have his protégés dominate the party’s incoming ruling group. He even weighed in on how to deal with Bo Xilai, the populist popular political figure who was caught up in a major scandal and was investigated after his wife was accused of murdering a British businessman.
Mr. Jiang has also sought to shape policy, party insiders say, by proposing changes to an agenda-setting report that will be presented Thursday on the opening day of the 18th Party Congress, the weeklong meeting that precedes the naming of Mr. Hu’s replacement and a new generation of leaders.
Mr. Jiang’s goal, those insiders say, appears to be to put China back on a path toward market-oriented economic policies that he and his allies argue stagnated under a decade of cautious leadership by Mr. Hu, a colorless party leader who favored more traditional socialist programs and allowed gargantuan state-owned companies to amass greater wealth and influence. Many see Mr. Jiang, who brought China into the World Trade Organization and rebuilt ties to the United States after a breakdown in 1989, as favoring deeper ties to the West and more opportunities for China’s private sector.
Mr. Jiang was able to outflank Mr. Hu to shape a new lineup for the Politburo Standing Committee, the top decision-making body that, at the moment, appears to have Jiang allies chosen for five of the projected seven seats, according to party insiders. The most prominent is Xi Jinping, the designated heir to Mr. Hu as party chief and president.
“Just look at the final seven people and you know who the big winner is: Jiang, or Jiang and Xi,” said an editor at a party media organization. “The loser is Hu.”
That Mr. Jiang has been able to insert himself so boldly shows how diluted power has become at the apex of the Communist Party, just as policy makers and intellectuals from all quarters say the nation needs strong leadership to guide it through a period of a slowing economy and rising social discontent.
Some supporters of Mr. Jiang say his involvement might give greater confidence to policy makers who could prove more amenable than Mr. Hu to loosening the hold of state-owned conglomerates in some crucial sectors, like finance and transportation, and also more inclined to establish a credible legal system that operates with a degree of autonomy from the party.
Such steps could inject vigor into the economy, while also signaling modest steps toward accountability demanded by China’s expanding middle class.
Even so, Mr. Jiang’s return to the center of party politics also exposes fundamental weaknesses in a system that relies on factional alliances and aging patriarchs to make crucial decisions.
China’s ambitions to rise to be a modern global power remain yoked to a secretive political system in which true authority resides in hidden recesses. That could spell trouble for Mr. Hu’s presumed successor, Mr. Xi, who has yet to establish his own credentials as the party’s ultimate authority. When the congress ends next week, there will be 20 retired Standing Committee members, most of whom expect some say in running the country and appointing allies.
Mr. Jiang does not possess the indomitable behind-the-scenes power once held by Deng Xiaoping, who ushered in market reforms after the death of Mao Zedong. But a year of division and uncertainty has created openings for Mr. Jiang to shape important decisions.
“The atmosphere seems very tense,” said Christopher K. Johnson, a former C.I.A. analyst now at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, who recently visited Beijing. “The problem is that there’s no senior figure in charge — there’s no revolutionary elder to act as arbiter and manage the different groups here.”
“My sense of the games that Jiang is playing is, ‘This is my last hurrah, and I want to show that I still matter,’ ” Mr. Johnson said.
Mr. Jiang retired as party secretary in November 2002 and stepped down as state president the following March. He remained the chief of China’s military until late 2004, which led to impatience among many party officials. His relationship with his successor has been a delicate one, shaped by the fact that Mr. Hu was put on the path to the top leadership by the party patriarch, Mr. Deng, leaving Mr. Jiang with no independent choice over who would succeed him.
The decade-long rule of Mr. Hu and Wen Jiabao, the prime minister, has been criticized as a period when China’s leaders, despite the nation’s robust economic growth over much of that period, bolstered state enterprises, expanded the security apparatus and eroded basic legal protections. Mr. Jiang has been the most powerful voice privately chiding the Hu administration’s policies.
“His line of attack has been that Hu Jintao and Wen Jiabao have been too cautious about reform, and the slowdown in growth might have been mitigated by more aggressive reforms earlier on,” one official said.
Any calls for reform in China encompass a broad array of possibilities. Some intellectuals and policy advisers are seeking a significant relaxation of China’s authoritarian political system, but there is no sign Mr. Jiang backs any such transformation. Instead, he seems primarily focused on economic issues.
Mr. Jiang was able to raise his concerns about the direction of policy when invited to comment on a draft of the political report that will be presented to the 18th Party Congress, said two party insiders. That report is intended to mostly sum up the achievements under Mr. Hu, but also to sketch out future priorities.
Political insiders said that Mr. Jiang’s involvement in determining the new Standing Committee, expected to be announced at the end of the congress next week, is his clearest expression of impatience with Mr. Hu’s policies and faction. Months ago, analysts had expected the incoming committee to be almost evenly balanced between Hu and Jiang allies. But Mr. Jiang’s power plays, aided by scandals this year, including one that weakened Ling Jihua, a powerful aide of Mr. Hu’s, have changed that.
One recent move by Mr. Jiang was to strongly back Yu Zhengsheng, the party chief of Shanghai, for a Standing Committee seat. Other Jiang allies expected to join the committee are Zhang Dejiang, a vice prime minister and party chief of Chongqing; Zhang Gaoli, the party chief of Tianjin; and Wang Qishan, another vice prime minister.
Of the favorites for the committee, only Li Keqiang, the designated prime minister, and Liu Yunshan, director of the party’s propaganda department, are considered allies of Mr. Hu’s. But even Mr. Liu received a career lift under Mr. Jiang.
Five of the seven would retire after one five-year term because of an age limit.
Mr. Jiang’s motives are not entirely clear. While several people say he mounted his political offensive in the name of reform, some say his allies in crucial party posts previously hindered any bold moves by Mr. Hu and Mr. Wen. And the proposed lineup that bears his imprint appears to be short of officials who are known to advocate market-driven growth and less state meddling. The two Zhangs are reputed to be conservative, and Mr. Wang, a supporter of a more open financial sector, looks unlikely to be given a major role in economic policy.
In principle, Mr. Jiang and other leaders are supposed to retreat from any public role in setting policy after leaving office. Mr. Jiang has filled in his years since retirement with a regimen of swimming, listening to tutorials with scholars, and preparing his biography and other publications, an aide to a prominent official said.
But Mr. Jiang has also used a succession of statements and appearances to send a signal that he remains active in politics. A preface written by Mr. Jiang to a history textbook published in July served to remind readers that he was paying attention to the party’s future. Despite China’s spectacular growth and rising power, he wrote, “We must clearly recognize that there are still many hardships and challenges on our road forward, in both domestic and external conditions.”

Jonathan Ansfield contributed reporting, and Amy Qin contributed research.

Friday, November 2, 2012

Billions in Hidden Riches for Family of Chinese Leader

Billions in Hidden Riches for Family of Chinese Leader


  • Petar Kujundzic/Reuters

  • Bo Bor/Reuters

  • ChinaTopix, via Associated Press

  • Xinhua, via Agence France-Presse — Getty Images


BEIJING — The mother of China’s prime minister was a schoolteacher in northern China. His father was ordered to tend pigs in one of Mao’s political campaigns. And during childhood, “my family was extremely poor,” the prime minister, Wen Jiabao, said in a speech last year.
Multimedia

Readers’ Comments

Readers shared their thoughts on this article.
But now 90, the prime minister’s mother, Yang Zhiyun, not only left poverty behind, she became outright rich, at least on paper, according to corporate and regulatory records. Just one investment in her name, in a large Chinese financial services company, had a value of $120 million five years ago, the records show.
The details of how Ms. Yang, a widow, accumulated such wealth are not known, or even if she was aware of the holdings in her name. But it happened after her son was elevated to China’s ruling elite, first in 1998 as vice prime minister and then five years later as prime minister.
Many relatives of Wen Jiabao, including his son, daughter, younger brother and brother-in-law, have become extraordinarily wealthy during his leadership, an investigation by The New York Times shows. A review of corporate and regulatory records indicates that the prime minister’s relatives — some of whom, including his wife, have a knack for aggressive deal making — have controlled assets worth at least $2.7 billion.
In many cases, the names of the relatives have been hidden behind layers of partnerships and investment vehicles involving friends, work colleagues and business partners. Untangling their financial holdings provides an unusually detailed look at how politically connected people have profited from being at the intersection of government and business as state influence and private wealth converge in China’s fast-growing economy.
Unlike most new businesses in China, the family’s ventures sometimes received financial backing from state-owned companies, including China Mobile, one of the country’s biggest phone operators, the documents show. At other times, the ventures won support from some of Asia’s richest tycoons. The Times found that Mr. Wen’s relatives accumulated shares in banks, jewelers, tourist resorts, telecommunications companies and infrastructure projects, sometimes by using offshore entities.
The holdings include a villa development project in Beijing; a tire factory in northern China; a company that helped build some of Beijing’s Olympic stadiums, including the well-known “Bird’s Nest”; and Ping An Insurance, one of the world’s biggest financial services companies.
As prime minister in an economy that remains heavily state-driven, Mr. Wen, who is best known for his simple ways and common touch, more importantly has broad authority over the major industries where his relatives have made their fortunes. Chinese companies cannot list their shares on a stock exchange without approval from agencies overseen by Mr. Wen, for example. He also has the power to influence investments in strategic sectors like energy and telecommunications.
Because the Chinese government rarely makes its deliberations public, it is not known what role — if any — Mr. Wen, who is 70, has played in most policy or regulatory decisions. But in some cases, his relatives have sought to profit from opportunities made possible by those decisions.
The prime minister’s younger brother, for example, has a company that was awarded more than $30 million in government contracts and subsidies to handle wastewater treatment and medical waste disposal for some of China’s biggest cities, according to estimates based on government records. The contracts were announced after Mr. Wen ordered tougher regulations on medical waste disposal in 2003 after the SARS outbreak.
In 2004, after the State Council, a government body Mr. Wen presides over, exempted Ping An Insurance and other companies from rules that limited their scope, Ping An went on to raise $1.8 billion in an initial public offering of stock. Partnerships controlled by Mr. Wen’s relatives — along with their friends and colleagues — made a fortune by investing in the company before the public offering.
In 2007, the last year the stock holdings were disclosed in public documents, those partnerships held as much as $2.2 billion worth of Ping An stock, according to an accounting of the investments by The Times that was verified by outside auditors. Ping An’s overall market value is now nearly $60 billion.
Ping An said in a statement that the company did “not know the background of the entities behind our shareholders.” The statement said, “Ping An has no means to know the intentions behind shareholders when they buy and sell our shares.”
While Communist Party regulations call for top officials to disclose their wealth and that of their immediate family members, no law or regulation prohibits relatives of even the most senior officials from becoming deal-makers or major investors — a loophole that effectively allows them to trade on their family name. Some Chinese argue that permitting the families of Communist Party leaders to profit from the country’s long economic boom has been important to ensuring elite support for market-oriented reforms.
Even so, the business dealings of Mr. Wen’s relatives have sometimes been hidden in ways that suggest the relatives are eager to avoid public scrutiny, the records filed with Chinese regulatory authorities show. Their ownership stakes are often veiled by an intricate web of holdings as many as five steps removed from the operating companies, according to the review.
In the case of Mr. Wen’s mother, The Times calculated her stake in Ping An — valued at $120 million in 2007 — by examining public records and government-issued identity cards, and by following the ownership trail to three Chinese investment entities. The name recorded on his mother’s shares was Taihong, a holding company registered in Tianjin, the prime minister’s hometown.
The apparent efforts to conceal the wealth reflect the highly charged politics surrounding the country’s ruling elite, many of whom are also enormously wealthy but reluctant to draw attention to their riches. When Bloomberg News reported in June that the extended family of Vice President Xi Jinping, set to become China’s next president, had amassed hundreds of millions of dollars in assets, the Chinese government blocked access inside the country to the Bloomberg Web site.
“In the senior leadership, there’s no family that doesn’t have these problems,” said a former government colleague of Wen Jiabao who has known him for more than 20 years and who spoke on the condition of anonymity. “His enemies are intentionally trying to smear him by letting this leak out.”
The Times presented its findings to the Chinese government for comment. The Foreign Ministry declined to respond to questions about the investments, the prime minister or his relatives. Members of Mr. Wen’s family also declined to comment or did not respond to requests for comment.
Duan Weihong, a wealthy businesswoman whose company, Taihong, was the investment vehicle for the Ping An shares held by the prime minister’s mother and other relatives, said the investments were actually her own. Ms. Duan, who comes from the prime minister’s hometown and is a close friend of his wife, said ownership of the shares was listed in the names of Mr. Wen’s relatives in an effort to conceal the size of Ms. Duan’s own holdings.
“When I invested in Ping An I didn’t want to be written about,” Ms. Duan said, “so I had my relatives find some other people to hold these shares for me.”
But it was an “accident,” she said, that her company chose the relatives of the prime minister as the listed shareholders — a process that required registering their official ID numbers and obtaining their signatures. Until presented with the names of the investors by The Times, she said, she had no idea that they had selected the relatives of Wen Jiabao.
The review of the corporate and regulatory records, which covers 1992 to 2012, found no holdings in Mr. Wen’s name. And it was not possible to determine from the documents whether he recused himself from any decisions that might have affected his relatives’ holdings, or whether they received preferential treatment on investments.
For much of his tenure, Wen Jiabao has been at the center of rumors and conjecture about efforts by his relatives to profit from his position. Yet until the review by The Times, there has been no detailed accounting of the family’s riches.
His wife, Zhang Beili, is one of the country’s leading authorities on jewelry and gemstones and is an accomplished businesswoman in her own right. By managing state diamond companies that were later privatized, The Times found, she helped her relatives parlay their minority stakes into a billion-dollar portfolio of insurance, technology and real estate ventures.
The couple’s only son sold a technology company he started to the family of Hong Kong’s richest man, Li Ka-shing, for $10 million, and used another investment vehicle to establish New Horizon Capital, now one of China’s biggest private equity firms, with partners like the government of Singapore, according to records and interviews with bankers.
The prime minister’s younger brother, Wen Jiahong, controls $200 million in assets, including wastewater treatment plants and recycling businesses, the records show.
As prime minister, Mr. Wen has staked out a position as a populist and a reformer, someone whom the state-run media has nicknamed “the People’s Premier” and “Grandpa Wen” because of his frequent outings to meet ordinary people, especially in moments of crisis like natural disasters.
While it is unclear how much the prime minister knows about his family’s wealth, State Department documents released by the WikiLeaks organization in 2010 included a cable that suggested Mr. Wen was aware of his relatives’ business dealings and unhappy about them.
“Wen is disgusted with his family’s activities, but is either unable or unwilling to curtail them,” a Chinese-born executive working at an American company in Shanghai told American diplomats, according to the 2007 cable.
China’s ‘Diamond Queen’
It is no secret in China’s elite circles that the prime minister’s wife, Zhang Beili, is rich, and that she has helped control the nation’s jewelry and gem trade. But her lucrative diamond businesses became an off-the-charts success only as her husband moved into the country’s top leadership ranks, the review of corporate and regulatory records by The Times found.
A geologist with an expertise in gemstones, Ms. Zhang is largely unknown among ordinary Chinese. She rarely travels with the prime minister or appears with him, and there are few official photographs of the couple together. And while people who have worked with her say she has a taste for jade and fine diamonds, they say she usually dresses modestly, does not exude glamour and prefers to wield influence behind the scenes, much like the relatives of other senior leaders.
The State Department documents released by WikiLeaks included a suggestion that Mr. Wen had once considered divorcing Ms. Zhang because she had exploited their relationship in her diamond trades. Taiwanese television reported in 2007 that Ms. Zhang had bought a pair of jade earrings worth about $275,000 at a Beijing trade show, though the source — a Taiwanese trader — later backed off the claim and Chinese government censors moved swiftly to block coverage of the subject in China, according to news reports at the time.
“Her business activities are known to everyone in the leadership,” said one banker who worked with relatives of Wen Jiabao. The banker said it was not unusual for her office to call upon businesspeople. “And if you get that call, how can you say no?”
Zhang Beili first gained influence in the 1990s, while working as a regulator at the Ministry of Geology. At the time, China’s jewelry market was still in its infancy.
While her husband was serving in China’s main leadership compound, known as Zhongnanhai, Ms. Zhang was setting industry standards in the jewelry and gem trade. She helped create the National Gemstone Testing Center in Beijing, and the Shanghai Diamond Exchange, two of the industry’s most powerful institutions.
In a country where the state has long dominated the marketplace, jewelry regulators often decided which companies could set up diamond-processing factories, and which would gain entry to the retail jewelry market. State regulators even formulated rules that required diamond sellers to buy certificates of authenticity for any diamond sold in China, from the government-run testing center in Beijing, which Ms. Zhang managed.
As a result, when executives from Cartier or De Beers visited China with hopes of selling diamonds and jewelry here, they often went to visit Ms. Zhang, who became known as China’s “diamond queen.”
“She’s the most important person there,” said Gaetano Cavalieri, president of the World Jewelry Confederation in Switzerland. “She was bridging relations between partners — Chinese and foreign partners.”
As early as 1992, people who worked with Ms. Zhang said, she had begun to blur the line between government official and businesswoman. As head of the state-owned China Mineral and Gem Corporation, she began investing the state company’s money in start-ups. And by the time her husband was named vice premier, in 1998, she was busy setting up business ventures with friends and relatives.
The state company she ran invested in a group of affiliated diamond companies, according to public records. Many of them were run by Ms. Zhang’s relatives — or colleagues who had worked with her at the National Gemstone Testing Center.
In 1993, for instance, the state company Ms. Zhang ran helped found Beijing Diamond, a big jewelry retailer. A year later, one of her younger brothers, Zhang Jianming, and two of her government colleagues personally acquired 80 percent of the company, according to shareholder registers. Beijing Diamond invested in Shenzhen Diamond, which was controlled by her brother-in-law, Wen Jiahong, the prime minister’s younger brother.
Among the successful undertakings was Sino-Diamond, a venture financed by the state-owned China Mineral and Gem Corporation, which she headed. The company had business ties with a state-owned company managed by another brother, Zhang Jiankun, who worked as an official in Jiaxing, Ms. Zhang’s hometown, in Zhejiang Province.
In the summer of 1999, after securing agreements to import diamonds from Russia and South Africa, Sino-Diamond went public, raising $50 million on the Shanghai Stock Exchange. The offering netted Ms. Zhang’s family about $8 million, according to corporate filings.
Although she was never listed as a shareholder, former colleagues and business partners say Ms. Zhang’s early diamond partnerships were the nucleus of a larger portfolio of companies she would later help her family and colleagues gain a stake in.
The Times found no indication that Wen Jiabao used his political clout to influence the diamond companies his relatives invested in. But former business partners said that the family’s success in diamonds, and beyond, was often bolstered with financial backing from wealthy businessmen who sought to curry favor with the prime minister’s family.
“After Wen became prime minister, his wife sold off some of her diamond investments and moved into new things,” said a Chinese executive who did business with the family. He asked not to be named because of fear of government retaliation. Corporate records show that beginning in the late 1990s, a series of rich businessmen took turns buying up large stakes in the diamond companies, often from relatives of Mr. Wen, and then helped them reinvest in other lucrative ventures, like real estate and finance.
According to corporate records and interviews, the businessmen often supplied accountants and office space to investment partnerships partly controlled by the relatives.
“When they formed companies,” said one businessman who set up a company with members of the Wen family, “Ms. Zhang stayed in the background. That’s how it worked.”
The Only Son
Late one evening early this year, the prime minister’s only son, Wen Yunsong, was in the cigar lounge at Xiu, an upscale bar and lounge at the Park Hyatt in Beijing. He was having cocktails as Beijing’s nouveau riche gathered around, clutching designer bags and wearing expensive business suits, according to two guests who were present.
In China, the children of senior leaders are widely believed to be in a class of their own. Known as “princelings,” they often hold Ivy League degrees, get V.I.P. treatment, and are even offered preferred pricing on shares in hot stock offerings.
They are also known as people who can get things done in China’s heavily regulated marketplace, where the state controls access. And in recent years, few princelings have been as bold as the younger Mr. Wen, who goes by the English name Winston and is about 40 years old.
A Times review of Winston Wen’s investments, and interviews with people who have known him for years, show that his deal-making has been extensive and lucrative, even by the standards of his princeling peers.
State-run giants like China Mobile have formed start-ups with him. In recent years, Winston Wen has been in talks with Hollywood studios about a financing deal.
Concerned that China does not have an elite boarding school for Chinese students, he recently hired the headmasters of Choate and Hotchkiss in Connecticut to oversee the creation of a $150 million private school now being built in the Beijing suburbs.
Winston Wen and his wife, moreover, have stakes in the technology industry and an electric company, as well as an indirect stake in Union Mobile Pay, the government-backed online payment platform — all while living in the prime minister’s residence, in central Beijing, according to corporate records and people familiar with the family’s investments.
“He’s not shy about using his influence to get things done,” said one venture capitalist who regularly meets with Winston Wen.
The younger Mr. Wen declined to comment. But in a telephone interview, his wife, Yang Xiaomeng, said her husband had been unfairly criticized for his business dealings.
“Everything that has been written about him has been wrong,” she said. “He’s really not doing that much business anymore.”
Winston Wen was educated in Beijing and then earned an engineering degree from the Beijing Institute of Technology. He went abroad and earned a master’s degree in engineering materials from the University of Windsor, in Canada, and an M.B.A. from the Kellogg School of Business at Northwestern University in Evanston, Ill., just outside Chicago.
When he returned to China in 2000, he helped set up three successful technology companies in five years, according to people familiar with those deals. Two of them were sold to Hong Kong businessmen, one to the family of Li Ka-shing, one of the wealthiest men in Asia.
Winston Wen’s earliest venture, an Internet data services provider called Unihub Global, was founded in 2000 with $2 million in start-up capital, according to Hong Kong and Beijing corporate filings. Financing came from a tight-knit group of relatives and his mother’s former colleagues from government and the diamond trade, as well as an associate of Cheng Yu-tung, patriarch of Hong Kong’s second-wealthiest family. The firm’s earliest customers were state-owned brokerage houses and Ping An, in which the Wen family has held a large financial stake.
He made an even bolder move in 2005, by pushing into private equity when he formed New Horizon Capital with a group of Chinese-born classmates from Northwestern. The firm quickly raised $100 million from investors, including SBI Holdings, a division of the Japanese group SoftBank, and Temasek, the Singapore government investment fund.
Under Mr. Wen, New Horizon established itself as a leading private equity firm, investing in biotech, solar, wind and construction equipment makers. Since it began operations, the firm has returned about $430 million to investors, a fourfold profit, according to SBI Holdings.
“Their first fund was dynamite,” said Kathleen Ng, editor of Asia Private Equity Review, an industry publication in Hong Kong. “And that allowed them to raise a lot more money.”
Today, New Horizon has more than $2.5 billion under management.
Some of Winston Wen’s deal-making, though, has attracted unwanted attention for the prime minister.
In 2010, when New Horizon acquired a 9 percent stake in a company called Sihuan Pharmaceuticals just two months before its public offering, the Hong Kong Stock Exchange said the late-stage investment violated its rules and forced the firm to return the stake. Still, New Horizon made a $46.5 million profit on the sale.
Soon after, New Horizon announced that Winston Wen had handed over day-to-day operations and taken up a position at the China Satellite Communications Corporation, a state-owned company that has ties to the Chinese space program. He has since been named chairman.
The Tycoons
In the late 1990s, Duan Weihong was managing an office building and several other properties in Tianjin, the prime minister’s hometown in northern China, through her property company, Taihong. She was in her 20s and had studied at the Nanjing University of Science and Technology.
Around 2002, Ms. Duan went into business with several relatives of Wen Jiabao, transforming her property company into an investment vehicle of the same name. The company helped make Ms. Duan very wealthy.
It is not known whether Ms. Duan, now 43, is related to the prime minister. In a series of interviews, she first said she did not know any members of the Wen family, but later described herself as a friend of the family and particularly close to Zhang Beili, the prime minister’s wife. As happened to a handful of other Chinese entrepreneurs, Ms. Duan’s fortunes soared as she teamed up with the relatives and their network of friends and colleagues, though she described her relationship with them involving the shares in Ping An as existing on paper only and having no financial component.
Ms. Duan and other wealthy businesspeople — among them, six billionaires from across China — have been instrumental in getting multimillion-dollar ventures off the ground and, at crucial times, helping members of the Wen family set up investment vehicles to profit from them, according to investment bankers who have worked with all parties.
Established in Tianjin, Taihong had spectacular returns. In 2002, the company paid about $65 million to acquire a 3 percent stake in Ping An before its initial public offering, according to corporate records and Ms. Duan’s graduate school thesis. Five years later, those shares were worth $3.7 billion
The company’s Hong Kong affiliate, Great Ocean, also run by Ms. Duan, later formed a joint venture with the Beijing government and acquired a huge tract of land adjacent to Capital International Airport. Today, the site is home to a sprawling cargo and logistics center. Last year, Great Ocean sold its 53 percent stake in the project to a Singapore company for nearly $400 million.
That deal and several other investments, in luxury hotels, Beijing villa developments and the Hong Kong-listed BBMG, one of China’s largest building materials companies, have been instrumental to Ms. Duan’s accumulation of riches, according to The Times’s review of corporate records.
The review also showed that over the past decade there have been nearly three dozen individual shareholders of Taihong, many of whom are either relatives of Wen Jiabao or former colleagues of his wife.
The other wealthy entrepreneurs who have worked with the prime minister’s relatives declined to comment for this article. Ms. Duan strongly denied having financial ties to the prime minister or his relatives and said she was only trying to avoid publicity by listing others as owning Ping An shares. “The money I invested in Ping An was completely my own,” said Ms. Duan, who has served as a member of the Ping An board of supervisors. “Everything I did was legal.”
Another wealthy partner of the Wen relatives has been Cheng Yu-tung, who controls the Hong Kong conglomerate New World Development and is one of the richest men in Asia, worth about $15 billion, according to Forbes.
In the 1990s, New World was seeking a foothold in mainland China for a sister company that specializes in high-end retail jewelry. The retail chain, Chow Tai Fook, opened its first store in China in 1998.
Mr. Cheng and his associates invested in a diamond venture backed by the relatives of Mr. Wen and co-invested with them in an array of corporate entities, including Sino-Life, National Trust and Ping An, according to records and interviews with some of those involved. Those investments by Mr. Cheng are now worth at least $5 billion, according to the corporate filings. Chow Tai Fook, the jewelry chain, has also flourished. Today, China accounts for 60 percent of the chain’s $4.2 billion in annual revenue.
Mr. Cheng, 87, could not be reached for comment. Calls to New World Development were not returned.
Fallout for Premier
In the winter of 2007, just before he began his second term as prime minister, Wen Jiabao called for new measures to fight corruption, particularly among high-ranking officials.
“Leaders at all levels of government should take the lead in the antigraft drive,” he told a gathering of high-level party members in Beijing. “They should strictly ensure that their family members, friends and close subordinates do not abuse government influence.”
The speech was consistent with the prime minister’s earlier drive to toughen disclosure rules for public servants, and to require senior officials to reveal their family assets.
Whether Mr. Wen has made such disclosures for his own family is unclear, since the Communist Party does not release such information. Even so, many of the holdings found by The Times would not need to be disclosed under the rules since they are not held in the name of the prime minister’s immediate family — his wife, son and daughter.
Eighty percent of the $2.7 billion in assets identified in The Times’s investigation and verified by the outside auditors were held by, among others, the prime minister’s mother, his younger brother, two brothers-in-law, a sister-in-law, daughter-in-law and the parents of his son’s wife, none of whom is subject to party disclosure rules. The total value of the relatives’ stake in Ping An is based on calculations by The Times that were confirmed by the auditors. The total includes shares held by the relatives that were sold between 2004 and 2006, and the value of the remaining shares in late 2007, the last time the holdings were publicly disclosed.
Legal experts said that determining the precise value of holdings in China could be difficult because there might be undisclosed side agreements about the true beneficiaries.
“Complex corporate structures are not necessarily insidious,” said Curtis J. Milhaupt, a Columbia University Law School professor who has studied China’s corporate group structures. “But in a system like China’s, where corporate ownership and political power are closely intertwined, shell companies magnify questions about who owns what and where the money came from.”
Among the investors in the Wen family ventures are longtime business associates, former colleagues and college classmates, including Yu Jianming, who attended Northwestern with Winston Wen, and Zhang Yuhong, a longtime colleague of Wen Jiahong, the prime minister’s younger brother. The associates did not return telephone calls seeking comment.
Revelations about the Wen family’s wealth could weaken him politically.
Next month, at the 18th Party Congress in Beijing, the Communist Party is expected to announce a new generation of leaders. But the selection process has already been marred by one of the worst political scandals in decades, the downfall of Bo Xilai, the Chongqing party boss, who was vying for a top position.
In Beijing, Wen Jiabao is expected to step down as prime minister in March at the end of his second term. Political analysts say that even after leaving office he could remain a strong backstage political force. But documents showing that his relatives amassed a fortune during his tenure could diminish his standing, the analysts said.
“This will affect whatever residual power Wen has,” said Minxin Pei, an expert on Chinese leadership and a professor of government at Claremont McKenna College in California.
The prime minister’s supporters say he has not personally benefited from his extended family’s business dealings, and may not even be knowledgeable about the extent of them.
Last March, the prime minister hinted that he was at least aware of the persistent rumors about his relatives. During a nationally televised news conference in Beijing, he insisted that he had “never pursued personal gain” in public office.
“I have the courage to face the people and to face history,” he said in an emotional session. “There are people who will appreciate what I have done, but there are also people who will criticize me. Ultimately, history will have the final say.”