On the creditibility of official statements from Chinese government...

How creditable is it really, of any official statements from the Chinese government? I always wonder about that.

It's not the first, but when you look at the news in an aggregated view, you would come to some sort of conclusion. Recently, there is the melamine scare in the contamination of milk in China. More worrisome is the alleged cover-up of the incident by the Chinese government, in order not to upset the historical event of Olympics in Beijing in the latter days. So, we have the Chinese officials now, quickly lining up a few arrests, supposedly "resolving" the issue, since the official line has it that it's only those few corrupted citizens who are to blame. And then reports came out that Chinese citizens whose babies were getting sick had been complaining to the companies, and then to the government, but were silenced because Chinese government doesn't want to upset its status as the export king. Foreign companies after companies have been maintaining that their food products are in the clear since the Chinese government agencies clear them. Apparently the "warranty" from Chinese government agencies don't mean squat, and now all these companies have to conduct their OWN tests to see if their products were infected.

And then, there was news of suspicion that the Chinese Olympics medalists in gymnasts are underaged. Westerners might think, well, these girls are Chinese, they probably just look small in size. I don't know about you, but I know how Asian girls should look like, because I'm one. And most of them look like 12-13 to me. Sixteen, you say? No way. Chinese government has been insisting that they are not underaged. They even have proper documents to prove it. Well, if you ask me, that's like asking the wolf to mind the hen house. Who issues those documents? Chinese government. Who's the accused (for sending underaged gymnasts to Olympics)? Chinese government. Even one of suspected gymnast let "slip" that she wasn't born in the year on her document (and she was younger). But then, there is the universal truth that if you get powerful enough, nobody wants to upset. So we have the IOC who claims that they "properly investigated" the incident, but there's no truth in it, because the documents (issued by Chinese government) support the statements (from Chinese government). IOC would not want to upset China after it hosts one of biggest Olympics games so far. Truth, afterall, is in the eyes of the beholder.

So, you'd ask, what's the big deal?

(1) Well, for one, I would "eat local", ie. I eat fresh produce in US, from US. I don't really eat much snacks and sweets, and this is just one more reason why I shouldn't start on it.

(2) I still don't buy those (or any) official lines from Chinese government. Perhaps I'm being harsh, but once a sinner, always a sinner, and Chinese government has not helped itself to dispel that belief by lying time and again.

(3) And I won't buy in those "red chips," as those publicly listed Chinese companies (mostly state run) on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange. I have no faith whatsoever in the financials that these companies put out. I don't believe in their audit reports. (Check too on how often they change auditors.) Their numbers are just fantasy.