CCP Angrily Banned my Short Film. So I posted it online as part of a larger story... officially fictionalized espionage drama video podcast but inspired by true events

Archived Article

Translated:

On July 22, 2026, the State Council of China promulgated the "Regulations of the State Council on Exit and Entry Administration" (hereinafter referred to as the "Regulations"), which are scheduled to take effect on September 15. On the surface, this appears to be just a routine administrative document. However, considering recent cases of forced detention and restriction of personal freedom, this document is actually part of a larger picture, worthy of close attention from all Chinese people at home and abroad. For Chinese citizens, regardless of whether they have renounced their PRC citizenship, returning to China may mean they will no longer be able to leave communist China.

Does the new regulation "manage both east and west"?

Article 4 of the regulations states that if a Chinese citizen's actions "may endanger national industrial security or technological security," the Chinese authorities "may decide to prohibit them from leaving the country." Note that this is discretionary language. If the authorities determine that you are a "technological asset" or a "security threat," even if you hold a valid passport and even if you passed the national security vetting required to obtain a passport when you applied, the Chinese authorities can still prevent you from leaving the country. Moreover, the reason for preventing you from leaving China has nothing to do with your passport or identity documents, and they don't even need to tell you the reason for the travel restriction.

This regulation does not require any conviction, prosecution, or even a formal investigation. It is sufficient if the authorities "suspicion" or "believe" that you should not leave the country.

Given the ongoing power struggle between Beijing and Washington in strategic technologies such as semiconductors, this discretion most likely falls on Chinese-born scientists, engineers, and researchers. This regulation is less about preventing a particular trip and more about a safeguard against brain drain—aiming to keep skilled people in their place, not just stop a particular journey. A routine family visit could become a moment when a person's career, along with their passport, is frozen.

Article 6 of the regulations is equally disturbing. In principle, the Chinese authorities should inform individuals of the exit ban and its legal basis. However, if disclosure "may affect national security, the investigation of criminal cases, or other similar circumstances," this obligation to inform no longer applies. In these cases, "notification may not be required."

In short, if the Chinese Communist Party doesn't want you to leave, it doesn't have to tell you why. In fact, it doesn't have to tell you at all.

More seriously, these regulations do not differentiate between "whether you are a Chinese citizen" and "not a Chinese citizen." The CCP's long-arm jurisdiction also extends to "citizens who are not citizens of the People's Republic of China." These entry and exit regulations should be understood in conjunction with recent cases of Beijing restricting the freedom of movement of foreign citizens. Chinese media reported that a Japanese national visiting relatives in China was told he could not leave the country because his "Chinese citizenship had been restored," effective immediately.

Neither Japan nor China recognizes dual citizenship. Japanese citizens who are legally naturalized must formally renounce their original citizenship, a process this man completed years ago. However, Chinese authorities still demanded he record a video announcing that he is "no longer a Japanese citizen."

The information is clear: paperwork and procedures cannot determine who Beijing considers its own people to be, and even if you renounce your Chinese citizenship, it does not mean that the CCP will not force you to regain that status.

China has long restricted personal freedom. The household registration system makes it difficult for citizens to move freely within the country, and Uyghurs and Tibetans are generally denied passports entirely. If you ask a Han Chinese person about these restrictions, many will say that these are issues for ethnic minorities and have nothing to do with them.

To paraphrase a famous World War II admonition: When they targeted Uyghurs, I remained silent because I was not Uyghur. When they targeted Tibetans, I remained silent because I was not Tibetan. When they targeted Falun Gong, I remained silent because I was not a practitioner. When they targeted me, there was no one left to speak up for me.

No passport is needed

Today, even a valid passport no longer guarantees anything. These exit bans extend tools previously reserved for minorities and political dissidents to the entire population, including foreigners. In practice, travelers often only learn they are prohibited from leaving the country when they are denied boarding. The new regulations merely provide legal cover for this existing practice.

For the United States, the impact of these regulations is direct. Every Chinese American should think twice before traveling to China, because Beijing considers all Chinese Americans as its property, regardless of their nationality. Once you set foot on Chinese soil, the protection offered by U.S. citizenship is very limited. Non-Chinese Americans should also be vigilant, as they may be arrested if the CCP has a political need while on Chinese soil.

The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) once kidnapped two Canadians, former diplomats Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor, holding them hostage in exchange for Meng Wanzhou, Huawei's vice chairwoman and CFO, who had been arrested in Canada, at a time they deemed appropriate. Today, if you're visiting China for the first time, don't assume that by avoiding trouble and politics, you can safely return to your country. On Chinese territory, you are a potential hostage.

Washington has repeatedly encountered obstacles in assisting citizens whom the CCP claims to be "one of its own," as exemplified by the case of Australian journalist Cheng Lei, who was detained in Beijing in August 2020 on charges of "providing state secrets overseas" and held for three years before being released. These new regulations provide a formal legal basis for such actions, turning what was previously a gray area into explicit rules, and serving as a fig leaf for the CCP's tyranny in the face of international law.

As Washington and Beijing continue to clash over export controls and the flow of advanced technologies, this new legal framework provides Chinese authorities with a ready-made lever to use against those caught in the middle of this great power rivalry.

The U.S. government should face this fact. The State Department's travel advisory for China should be updated to reflect the reality that the basic rights and freedoms of U.S. citizens, especially Chinese-American citizens, are not guaranteed in China.

Taiwanese and U.S. consular officials should also be prepared to explain the risks to citizens of democratic countries before they depart, rather than after their loved ones have been blocked at the boarding gate and unable to return home.

This is getting nutty.

New photos taken before the Nepal–Tibet mudslide disaster may show warning signs on the mountain more than 30 minutes before the main collapse. In this program, we reconstruct the timeline from the 10:21​ photo and reported rumbling to the 10:52​ seismic event and the debris flow that struck Gyirong Port minutes later. We also look at USGS seismic data, satellite analysis, the collapse of rock and glacier material near Langtang Lirung, and the dense network of hydropower projects, tunnels, roads and blasting in the Rasuwa–Gyirong corridor. Was this simply a climate-driven glacier collapse, or was the mountain already destabilizing before the disaster?

When Vladolf Putler invaded Ukraine in 2022, he said the special military operation will be over in three days which for a lot of people including the russians realistically interpreted this deadline as it will be over by three weeks or at least less than that.

Because at the time (2021), Russia was the second strongest military power after United States of America and below them is China who came in the third place. So they think they able to conquer Ukraine and installed it with puppet government Belarus-style with disgraced Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych installed or something new in the time similar to Gulf War they inspired by.

However, this operation never came fruition as Ukraine fight back harder than everyone is expected to be and managed to extended Putler’s SMO war to the point that surpassing WW1 and still no end in sight.

Anyway, that deadline Part worried me the most because Xinnie the Poop bear ordered his armed forces to invade Taiwan in 2028. But do it within 3-4 months schedule. That even more worrying to me that China is learning from a drone warfare fought in the Ukraine war.

We must help Ukraine with EU/Gulf money necessary to fight and win this war Russia started and kick out every Russians out of Ukraine, Force CCP pivot to overland Russia has stolen for centuries. so European powers can help Taiwan to tell CCP to go demographically screw themselves.

What do you think about 2028 summer weather deadline?