Officially, China has called its refusal to allow a U.S. Navy aircraft carrier to dock in Hong Kong over last week’s Thanksgiving holiday a big, terrible “misunderstanding.” Chinese foreign minister Yang Jiechi characterized the event as such during a closed-door meeting with George Bush on Wednesday, according to reports. Thursday, a tabloid published by China’s Communist Party offered a contradictory justification. The paper cited a military official as blaming the snub on Washington’s decision to sell an anti-missile defense system to Taiwan. I’m not sure I believe either explanation is true.

As I wrote Thanksgiving Day, the Kitty Hawk was scheduled to dock in Hong Kong last Wednesday. Hundreds of the crew’s families flew from Japan, where the ship is based, to greet the servicemen and spend the American holiday in Hong Kong. When port entrance was denied, the Kitty Hawk and the disappointed families were forced to return to the ship’s home port of Yokosuka, near Tokyo. The Pentagon called the ordeal “baffling” and told the press, “It’s regrettable and we have not to date received sufficient explanation as to why it took place.”

A “misunderstanding” is a failure to understand something correctly or a mistake as to intent. It’s also an awesome song by Genesis. But what it is not is a word one can use to describe last China’s actions last Wednesday, one of the most deplorable acts of military inhospitality in recent memory. If you’re a China apologist, as I am at times, consider this: just prior to the Kitty Hawk incident, China refused to allow two U.S. minesweepers in the midst of a threatening storm to dock for safety in Hong Kong. To many military experts, this incident dwarfs the Kitty Hawk snub in its egregiousness. In an AP story Thursday, Admiral Mike Mullen, former chief of the U.S. Navy, was quoted as saying, “That’s an international rule that people who go to sea and responsible nations who are seagoing nations understand, that you always provide safe harbor, then you figure out, if you want to figure out some of the details… China chose not to do that.”

A misunderstanding is characterized by a isolated breakdown in communication, not multiple instances of military hostility and a repeated disregard for the safety of military men at sea.

For over a week, journalists have speculated as to why China would choose to so publicly void its collective rheum and spit directly into America’s face. Some said it was a retaliatory measure for Bush’s celebration of the Dalai Lama last month in Washington. Not likely. But the more popular belief, and supported by The Global Times, the aforementioned tabloid, is that China was retaliating against U.S. plans to sell Taiwan a missile defense system.

According to the International Herald Tribune, the Global Times cited an unidentified senior colonel in the Chinese military, who confirmed that the aggression on behalf of China was in response to the U.S. plans to sell a $940 million upgrade to its Patriot missile system. Here are the details of the deal as reported by Radio Taiwan International on November 14th:

The deal is aimed at strengthening Taiwan’s defense capability against a potential missile attack from China. The Pentagon estimates that China currently has approximately 1,000 short range missiles aimed at Taiwan. China has already signaled its opposition to the proposed deal.

While China did vehemently protest the sale, Taiwan has relied on the U.S. for military weapons for decades and China has never retaliated the way it did last week in Hong Kong. While this may seem plausible, it seems odd that after 60 years of U.S.-Taiwan friendship, that China, all of a sudden, wishes to seek revenge.

Even if China attributes its snub to America’s sale of weapons to Taiwan, this doesn’t necessarily mean it’s true. Perhaps China wants the world to believe the simplistic U.S-Taiwan story in order to suppress and take attention away from a far more dangerous explanation that most of the world’s media has missed.

China routinely holds secret military exercises in and over the waters of the South China Sea. The government periodically shuts down airports in and south of Shanghai, and closes the airspace in southeast China to commercial traffic. No official explanation is ever given for these closures, but no official explanation is ever really needed. Everyone here knows why.

Beginning Tuesday, November 20th, a day before the Kitty Hawk ordeal, China issued one of these airspace closures because its military was to engage in military drills off the southeastern coast. According to a Xinhua story from Thanksgiving Day:

Airspace controls that were imposed over eastern China starting on Tuesday morning might be extended until Sunday, sources with the China Eastern airline company said Thursday. The controls, imposed for unspecified reasons, have affected thousands of passengers traveling to and from eastern China, particularly at airports in Shanghai and Guangzhou.

Always for “unspecified reasons.”

The truth, or at least what I believe to be the truth, is that all of last week, the Chinese military was rehearsing a full-scale attack on Taiwan. This is why the airspace over Shanghai was closed and this is why the Kitty Hawk was refused entry. Here is an excerpt from a Taipei Times story Thursday:

Another explanation was offered by the Hong Kong-based Ming Pao daily, which said the Chinese snub was connected to a large-scale military exercise recently conducted by the Chinese Navy’s Eastern and Southern Fleet in an area of the Pacific Ocean east of Taiwan and north of the Philippines.

The exercise was a drill for blockading Taiwan, it said.

“Sources said that during the exercise some Chinese ships ran into the Kitty Hawk’s battle group in international waters sailing toward Hong Kong,” an online version of the Ming Pao article said.

By refusing to allow the Kitty Hawk into Hong Kong, China “wanted to hide the details of their naval exercises and combat capability” to blockade the Taiwan Strait as part of a military attack on Taiwan, the newspaper said.

This sounds like China. Not a China sour that the Dalai Lama got a stupid medal. Or a China all-of-a-sudden fearful of the friendship between the U.S. and Taiwan. And certainly not a China whose military has “misunderstandings.” But the real China. The China, who as a result of an unexpected run-in with a U.S. ship docking in Hong Kong for Thanksgiving, did what it needed to do to keep its military secrets safe.

The China that thoroughly enjoys keeping the rest of world guessing.

•AP: China: Navy spat not a misunderstanding
•Xinhua: White House: U.S., China to Move Beyond Kitty Hawk Incident
•Taipei Times: US Commander Criticizes China Over Naval Snub

I remember my first flight to China like it was yesterday. It was an American Airlines flight from Chicago to Shanghai. I had a whole row to myself, about 6 movies to choose from and about 13 and a half hours to wish I was there already. The flight attendants on this trip were all very similar. Granted, they all had to wear the same uniform and all had their hair pulled back. These FAA requirements notwithstanding, they all seemed be carved from the same piece of stewardess stone. What all these American stewardesses had in common on my way to China was that they were all old. Not old enough to be my grandmother, but old nonetheless.

As I’ve traveled back and forth many times now, I realized that all the flights are like this — all of the flight attendants are older women (except for the young Chinese one whose job is to translate the flight announcements into Mandarin). They’re the type of older American woman who calls you “honey” the first time she meets you. Some are aged beauties, holdovers from the days when stewardesses in America had to be beautiful, and some are just aged. But all of them old. As one of these flight attendants explained to me during a mid-flight chat, the reason the flight crews are so aged on trips to Asia is because these are the most sought after flights. And thus, as their union rules dictate, the most senior of flight attendants have first crack at them. This stewardess told me that if she did two return trips to China each month then she wouldn’t have to work the rest of the month. That leaves her with three weeks out of every month to play bingo and eat dinner really early and do other things old people do. Not such a bad gig.

But let’s say you don’t want “something special in the air” and you decide to take a Chinese carrier to or from China. You’ll notice something much different. You’ll find that on Chinese airlines, there’s something really really special in the air — the flight attendants. They are gorgeous. And young. They have perfect figures, perfect hair, perfect skin and perfect smiles. If you wake up from a nap as one of them is walking through the cabin, in a half-conscious state you could reasonably mistake the airplane aisle for a fashion runway and the stewardess for a model. And when they say, “beef with rice or pork with noodles,” it’s with an angelic sweetness that will make you wish there was a third option.

The Chicago Tribune published a story Tuesday on the selection process Chinese airlines use to hire flight attendants. And consistent with my observations, apparently it is the most shallow and sexist process imaginable. You have to be young, beautiful and thin to be hired as a stewardess in China. According to the Tribune, “in the world’s fastest-growing aviation market, entry barriers for flight attendants are not only tolerated — they’re flaunted as symbols of excellence.” China’s largest carrier, China Southern Airlines, is in the process of filming a flight attendant reality show which features thousands of hot young girls competing for 180 openings. At China Southern, 45 is the mandatory retirement age. The head of the American flight attendant union called the contest “offensive” and “a setback to our profession on a global scale.” As with any profession in mainland China, flight attendants do not have a labor union. But if and when they get one, maybe 40 years from now when I’m old and gray, they will be the aged Chinese beauties who call me “honey” and attend to me as I fly the friendly Chinese skies.

•Chicago Tribune: Fly the Friendly — and Beautiful — Skies
•AskMen.com: Top 10 Hot Stewardess Airlines
•Photo: People’s Daily

In America, the tattoo, once a symbol of youthful indiscretion and rebellion, has become an item so ordinary that a college girl’s lower back or an NBA player’s shoulder looks strange without one. What used to be for bikers and rock stars is now for the masses and as an AP story Monday points out, marketers at America’s biggest companies are taking notice of a growing tattoo culture. A new energy drink called Inked admittedly targets the tattoo generation, namely men and women between the ages of 26 and 40, 40% of whom are inked. This tattoo generation not only encompasses those who have tattoos, but those who, according to the story, “want to think of themselves as the tattoo type.” We all know these guys — the guys who don’t boast any tattoos but wear a low-riding cap tilted a bit to the left to make up for it. What the AP failed to mention is the contrapositive of this group: those who do have tattoos but wouldn’t consider themselves part of tattoo culture. Like the girl with a butterfly tattoo on her ankle who would pass up the can of Inked in favor of a Vitamin Water. The pervasiveness of tattoos in the early years of this decade led many tame, ordinary people to flock to the tattoo parlor and do what was once the unthinkable (and what is still the unthinkable for most of the Jewish population). But not only are brands targeting this group with new products, but some companies are actually branding their brand onto the skin of the most daring of tattoo enthusiasts. The tire company Goodyear offers a free set of wheels to anyone who’s willing to tattoo the flying-D logo from its Dunlop brand, and 98 people so far have been willing. If you’re wondering who these people are and why they want the Dunlop logo indelibly carved into their skin, here’s how the Goodyear brand marketing manager described them to the AP: “Some of them are brand loyalists who already own Dunlop tires, while others were tattoo fans who wanted to add to their body art…One returned for his third Dunlop tattoo this year.” Someone must really need tires. There’s even a website that exists called Leaseyourbody.com, that matches up advertisers with nitwits who want to make their body a walking billboard. In August, a Pittsburgh waitress became the company’s first subject when she was contracted to wear a temporary tattoo of the Leaseyourbody.com logo on her forehead. While the saturation of tattoos in America has undoubtedly made them less cool, their potential as ads seems limitless. Tattoos are noticeable, mobile and they last forever.

•AP: Tattoo Ads Make Walking Billboards
•Flumesday.com: Most Regrettable Tattoos

As Ali G. once said, “Yo. Science. What is it all about? Is it good or is it whack?” In some cases, it really is whack, like when it’s misused to support political beliefs or assertions that are overtly unreasonable, racist or absurd. I’ll give you an example relating to China. In August, Ben Goldacre, author of the “Bad Science” column at the Guardian UK, wrote about two Italian scientists who published an article in the reputable academic journal Medical Hypotheses titled “Down subjects and Oriental population share several specific attitudes and characteristics.” Rather than curing cancer or AIDS, these two scientists spent their time proving that people with Down’s Syndrome are more closely linked biologically with Asians than with white people. One of the parallels between the two groups cited was “Down subjects adore having several dishes displayed on the table, and have a propensity for food which is rich in monosodium glutamate (M.S.G.).” This is an example of science that truly is whack.

Most of the time, as a former science teacher, I find that science is not only good, but fundamental in helping us to understand those phenomena in life that cannot be be explained. One such phenomenon is Web addiction in China. Anyone who’s ever stepped foot into a Internet Cafe in China late at night has witnessed the same obsessive behavior and powerlessness one would find described in an AA handbook. A new study, rooted in science, found that Chinese people are more likely to be addicted to the Internet than Americans. The IAC/InterActiveCorp conducted a survey earlier this month in which they asked 2100 users aged 16 to 25, Chinese and American, how they felt about their own personal Web habits. Here are the results of the survey as published in a Reuters story Monday:

The survey found that 42 per cent of users in China said they at times felt “addicted” to their web use compared with 18 per cent of U.S. users…Nearly 25 per cent of Chinese users said they would not be able to spend more than a day without the internet compared with 12 percent of U.S. participants…Less than a third of Americans said the internet contributes to their social life, but 77 per cent of Chinese users said the web helped them make friends…Nearly three-quarters of Chinese users said they were free to do and say things online that they would not do in the real world, compared with 32 per cent of U.S. users.

I believe this last point is most crucial in understanding Internet addiction in China. The Internet affords the Chinese user an anonymity and freedom of expression not found in what is referred to as “the real world.” In a country where video, music and news is censored, it seems logical that the Web, where you can access pretty much anything, holds such power over Chinese users. Plus, the Internet has video games. And you don’t need a scientist to tell you how addictive video games are.

•Reuters: Chinese More Likely to Be Web Addicts: Study
•Photo: Kate Thorpe’s Flickr Page

A disturbing rumor made its way into the pages of two of the Western world’s least trusted names in news Sunday, sending shocks from London to Los Angleles to the most remote villages in mainland China. According to Rav, “Britain’s Hottest Showbiz Reporter” at News of the World, Britney Spears is considering adopting a pair of 6-year-old Chinese twins. As Rav wrote in his column, “The desperate singer has told friends she’s in the final stages of talks with an adoption agency and plans to go ahead with the move very soon.” Spears recently lost custody of her own two biological children to ex-husband Kevin Federline following numerous public drug and alcohol-related incidents. If the rumor is true, Britney seems to be executing a standard modern-day business strategy: discarding domestically produced items and replacing them with Chinese-made goods. I think they call it outsourcing. Or is it offshoring? Either way, it’s wildly popular.

TMZ.com, which published the rumor on its site Sunday, questioned whether Britney could even find China on a map. I bet she could. However, I think her chances of making it through the Chinese adoption process are about as slim as the chance of K-Fed becoming the next Middle East Peace Envoy. For one, China’s adoption regulations prohibit single mothers and drug users from adopting Chinese babies. The Chinese government also takes into account body mass index when selecting new parents. Not that Britney’s obese, but she may have a better chance if she got herself back into “Oops…I Did It Again” shape. While I wish Britney the happiness that every pop princess deserves, I can’t help but sympathize with the nice couple in middle America with a pretty house and good jobs who spend years waiting for their Chinese baby only to get denied because Britney Spears wants a second try at being a mother.

•News of the World: Britney Spears to Adopt Chinese Twins
•Sydney Morning Herald: Britney Spears to Adopt Chinese Twins

You rememeber when you were a kid and you fantasized about athletes from different eras squaring off against each other? What would happen if Nolan Ryan pitched to Babe Ruth? Who would win a 1-on-1 game between Jordan and Bird? Would Ali in his prime beat Tyson in his? Well, tennis fans in China’s Special Gambling Region, or Macau, came pretty close to realizing one of these fantasies Saturday when the old world number one Pete Sampras squared off against the current world number one Roger Federer in an exhibition match at the Venetian. A half-bald, 36-year-old Sampras defeated the world’s top ranked player Roger Federer in straight sets (7-6, 6-4). While Sampras retired 5 years ago after winning the 2002 U.S. Open to play golf and spend time with his gorgeous wife, his serve on the fast surface at the Venetian proved too much for Federer Saturday. The Macau match was the third of a three-match Asian exhibition series this week between the two players. Federer beat Sampras in straight sets in each of the previous two matches — 6-4 6-3 in Seoul on Tuesday and 7-6 7-6 in Kuala Lumpur on Thursday. Many tennis fans and writers speculate that the only way a 36-year-old Sampras could beat Federer is if Federer let Sampras beat him. One blogger on TennisX wrote this following Federer’s defeat Saturday:

Sure, the series was interesting to watch, fun to speculate the “what ifs”, but as I’ve said before, the only thing this it proves (or proved) is that both Federer and Sampras like the cash. If you want to argue Pete’s serve could get him into the Top 20, fine I’ll listen to that, that’s about it. While Sampras clearly can still bring the heat on his serves, Federer appeared content hitting second serves to keep things interesting and competitive. And while Sampras labored with his movement, especially laterally, Federer appeared to be a full step if not two steps slower than he was just a week earlier in Shanghai.

Sampras, a true tennis gentleman, chalked up the victory as nothing more than Federer’s fatigue from a near perfect season in which he won 3 grand slams and the Shanghai Masters. He made no mention of Roger throwing the final match in Macau. Is Pistol Pete prime for a comeback? Sampras told the press after the match, “Let’s not get carried away. I had my time in the 90s.” Yes you did Pete. And you also had a lot more hair.

•Xinhua: Sampras Defeats Federer in Macau
•Photo: Xinhua

I miss the Sunday Times. I miss waking up on Sunday mornings and opening my apartment door to find that fat edition of the New York Times waiting to be scooped up and read. The next stop is the garbage can, where the multitude of circulars and advertising gets discarded before I can sit down with some coffee and begin reading. The Times gives a extra large helping of special interest stories on Sundays, and for those of us in China, who wait on Sunday evening with a cup of tea for the edition to pop up on the net, it means a few more China stories. This week, the China feature dealt with a topic I’ve written about numerous times: Western rock in China, a strikingly conspicuous topic lately as a string of Western acts have “rocked” China in the last two months. Two weeks ago I wrote a post called “Connections, Corruption and Concerts” about the new concert landscape in China. In my assessment of how far live music here has come in the last couple years, I wrote “Just two years ago, the announcement of an Ice-T concert at the now defunct Pegasus Club in Shanghai was described as ‘Breaking News’” by an English-language media site here. And in Sunday’s New York Times feature, music writer Ben Sisario writes, “Five years ago a concert by Kenny G was big news.” If you’re thinking I’m going for a plagiarism charge, think again. That would be ridiculous. I merely wanted to show you that when Flumesday and the New York Times say the same thing, the imagery here is just so much richer. Kenny G has been an obvious punchline for years. Ice-T is ripe to become a punchline. And I actually went to the trouble of finding a story tagged “Breaking News” about an Ice-T concert in Shanghai instead of just proclaiming it “big news.” Because I must correct Mr. Sisario on his assertion that a Kenny G show five years ago was big news. He makes it seem as though China has changed so much in the last 5 years, that a K.G. show wouldn’t be big news in China today. In fact, a Kenny G concert this year in Shanghai was HUGE news. The Jewish soprano saxophonist is like a beardless Jesus in the mainland. Everyone knows this. I’m glad the New York Times has taken notice of the China rock scene and for all those interested in this subject, Sisario’s piece gives an in-depth look at the growing tide of Western acts performing in the mainland.

•NYT: Western Pop Acts in China
•Flumesday.com: Connections, Corruption and Concerts

Turkeys Spread Wings in China

With more and more foreigners expatriating to China, this time of year, Turkey farms both in the mainland and abroad are cashing in. The China Daily reports that China imports around 100,000 tons of turkeys per year, 40% of which are sold during the Thanksgiving season. While Kung Pao Turkey and Turkey Fried Rice have yet to catch on in China (or be invented), mostly all of the turkeys imported to China end up in the homes of foreigners or in the restaurants in which foreigners eat. But as one Beijing-based Turkey farmer told the China Daily, “While very few Chinese people eat turkey now, the number is growing.”

China Denies Access to U.S. Aircraft Carrier

If the Thanksgiving holiday had a Scrooge, it would be China. From a Reuters story Wednesday, 8,000 U.S. airmen and sailors will be stranded in the South China Sea for Thanksgiving this year as China refused permission for the ship to dock in the Hong Kong harbor, where many of the crew members’ relatives are waiting to greet them. The move comes as a surprise to the U.S. military who could not get a clear explanation from China’s authorities. Reuters speculates that the move could be in response to George Bush’s meeting with the Dalai Lama last month or the U.S. intention to sell Taiwan a $940 million upgrade to its missile system. So all you Americans out there away from your families for Turkey Day, be thankful you’re not on an aircraft carrier in the South China Sea.

‘I’m Thankful for my Garbagemen’

In Hangzhou on Wednesday, university students celebrated the American holiday by giving thanks to the city’s sanitation workers. While China technically doesn’t celebrate Thanksgiving, apparently Hangzhou’s students thought the American holiday would be a good excuse to make red paper hearts to present to their garbagemen. While paper hearts are nice, I’m sure these street sweepers would have foregone these gifts for a good old American 4-day weekend.

Barbie Contracts Lead Poisoning

And finally, filed under “strange,” “stupid” and “anti-China” comes a new internet political ad from the the Campaign for America’s Future calling for the resignation of America’s Consumer Product Safety chairwoman Nancy Nord. The ad blames Nord for the rash of toxic toys made in China entering the American consumer market. As Fox News points out, a slew of anti-China consumer ads are hitting the internet in preparation of “Black Friday,” the official beginning of the American holiday season. In the ad, Barbie and Ken engage in a wild night of make-up sex and a week later, Barbie comes down with a disease. While the viewer is made to think it might be an STD, it turns out to be lead poisoning. Anyone who’s seen Ken naked knows he’s not giving anyone an STD.

Medical professionals in China are warning those who watch the uncensored version of Lust, Caution against replicating the sexual positions seen in the film. Chinese film buffs have taken to illegally downloading the uncut version of Ang Lee’s latest film, a spy thriller based in occupied Shanghai, because the sanitized version playing in Chinese movie theaters is devoid of the sex and violence in the original. If the fact that the film was censored wasn’t reason enough for the Chinese to seek out the uncensored version, how many people now will seek out the original cut now that they know there are sex scenes so nasty that doctors feel the need to issue warnings? If I were a Chinese guy with a speedy internet connection and an insuppressible sexual curiosity (an apt description for most Chinese guys, and guys in general), I would have that uncut version downloaded faster than you could say “piledriver.” Yu Zaoze, a gynecologist with the Guangzhou Modern Hospital told the Information Times, “Most of the sexual maneuvers in Lust, Caution are abnormal body positions. Only women with comparatively flexible bodies that have gymnastics or yoga experience are able to perform them. For average people to blindly copy them could lead to unnecessary physical harm.” Most of the moves in the film involve the female lead’s legs tucked all the way against her chest while she is penetrated. While most women “without gymnastics or yoga experience” probably can’t pull this off anyway, what really is the harm in trying?

•Times Online: Love Can Really Hurt, Film Buffs Are Told

I’ve been waiting for this since last summer when I saw ads on the Showtime network pitching its newest show, “Californication” starring David Duchovny. As soon as I saw Mulder cruising down a California highway with the word “Californication” plastered on the screen, I had a thought. Well two thoughts actually. The first was, “whoa, David Duchovny is still around.” And the second was, “whoa, Showtime is totally gonna get sued for that.” Not for putting Duchovny in a series. While that’s a questionable business decision, it’s certainly not unlawful. But most music fans know that the name “Californication” is the title of a 1999 Red Hot Chili Peppers album, and a pretty great album at that. Anthony Kiedis, the band’s lead singer, said of the name, “Californication is the signature CD, video and song of the band’s career.” On Monday, the Red Hot Chili Peppers sued Showtime claiming the use of the name by the network constitutes unfair competition, dilutes the value of the name and unfairly capitalizes from an inherent association with the band. To add insult to injury, a character on the show is named “Dani California,” the name of the first single off of the Chili Peppers’ 2006 album “Stadium Arcadium.” The show’s creator said he took the name from a 70s bumper sticker that read, “Don’t Californicate Oregon.” It is unclear whether the name “Californication” was even an original when the Chili Peppers used it. The J. Geils Band had a song back in 1984 called “Californicatin’” and a TIME magazine story from 1972 was titled “The Great Wild Californicated West.” While this article, and the J. Geils Band for that matter, are perhaps not within the collective consciousness the same way the Chili Peppers album might be, the name still wasn’t an original thought on behalf of Kiedis and his bandmates. Monday’s suit is not the first time musicians have sued a television show for the use of a name. In 2003, the 90s hip-hop group Arrested Development sued Fox for using the name “Arrested Development” for the title of, what was then, a new show. And back in 1990, FOX had to alter the name and logo of its sketch comedy program “In Living Color” when the hard rock band Living Colour filed suit. The Chili Peppers have asked for a temporary injunction barring Showtime from using the name. If this goes through, maybe the title can become, “Whoa, David Duchovny Is Still Around.”

•AP: Red Hot Chili Peppers Sue Showtime