The latest report from Amnesty International, “I Was Someone Else’s Property,” reveals a harrowing reality: at least 53 scam compounds across Cambodia have become hubs of modern slavery, human trafficking, torture, and forced labor. These compounds, often disguised as legitimate tech parks or business centers, are operated by transnational criminal networks with apparent impunity. Victims – lured by fake job ads – are imprisoned, abused, and coerced into defrauding people worldwide through online scams. The report documents how these operations are enabled by systemic corruption, weak law enforcement, and a lack of political will to dismantle the criminal infrastructure.
Drone footage of a scamming compound in Cambodia with high perimeter walls, security cameras and security guards
While Taiwanese citizens are not the largest group affected, they face unique and severe risks due to their international status. In recent raids, dozens of Taiwanese nationals were arrested, and many were wrongly identified as perpetrators rather than victims of trafficking. Without proper screening procedures, these individuals are often treated as criminals and, in some cases, forcibly extradited to China, where they face prosecution and detention under Beijing’s jurisdiction. Taiwan’s lack of formal diplomatic ties with Cambodia further complicates rescue efforts, leaving victims vulnerable and without recourse.
The situation is further exacerbated by the demographics of the victims. Many are extremely young, including minors, who are deceived by fraudulent job advertisements on social media platforms. These ads promise glamorous lifestyles and high-paying, easy work in Southeast Asia. Upon arrival, however, these individuals are stripped of their documents, confined under armed guard, and subjected to physical and psychological abuse. Surveillance systems, armed guards, and barbed wire fences make escape nearly impossible. The betrayal of their aspirations and the trauma of captivity leave lasting scars that are often overlooked in public discourse.
Amnesty International’s findings underscore the Cambodian government’s failure – and in some cases, complicity – in addressing these crimes. The lack of enforcement and accountability has emboldened criminal syndicates, allowing a billion-dollar shadow economy to flourish. Victims are often denied access to justice, and the absence of transparent investigations perpetuates a cycle of impunity.
Cambodian scam parks are a significant factor in the Thai-Cambodia conflict, serving as both a source of economic tension and a strategic target in the ongoing military clashes. The conflict, which reignited in December 2025 after a brief ceasefire brokered by the Trump administration, has seen Thailand conduct air strikes on at least five Cambodian casinos and resorts, which are widely believed to house scam operations These strikes are viewed by Thai officials and the public as a response to the perception that these facilities are hubs for cross-border online scams, which have generated billions of dollars annually and involved widespread human trafficking, forced labor, and torture of victims from Asia, Africa, and Latin America The Thai military’s targeting of these sites is seen as both a security measure and a political signal to the Thai public, demonstrating action against a major perceived threat
The economic stakes are high, as these scam centers are believed to be linked to powerful Cambodian political elites, including the Hun family, and are a major source of illicit revenue Thailand’s proposed legalization of casinos near the border threatens to undermine this lucrative system by reducing the need for money laundering through Cambodian casinos and cutting into their earnings This economic competition, combined with the political fallout from a leaked phone call between Thailand’s acting Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra and Cambodia’s former Prime Minister Hun Sen, has further inflamed tensions The conflict has also been exacerbated by nationalist sentiments on both sides, with the Thai government using the issue to rally public support and Cambodia’s leadership potentially leveraging the conflict to distract from domestic socio-economic challenges
The speaker in the video is Cao Changqing (曹長青), a prominent Chinese dissident, writer, and commentator known for his outspoken criticism of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).This clip features a common argument in anti-CCP dissident circles, comparing the CCP’s historical concessions on territories like Outer Mongolia (citing Guo Moruo’s article) to its fixation on Taiwan—not for territorial reasons, but because Taiwan’s democratic system exposes the authoritarian nature of the CCP regime.Cao frequently appears in exile media and online videos discussing similar themes.
The Taiwan issue actually has nothing to do with the question of unification or independence. Because after the Communist Party seized power, it gave up territory exceeding more than 50 Taiwans. Just Outer Mongolia alone is already roughly 50 Taiwans. At the time when the Communist Party abandoned Outer Mongolia, Guo Moruo was the president of the Chinese Academy of Sciences and Mao Zedong’s personal literati. He even wrote an article in the People’s Daily titled “Why We Should Cheer for the Independence of Outer Mongolia.” You can still find that article online. So, if you add in things like the Northeast, it might exceed 100 Taiwans—no exaggeration. Yes, and territories disputed with Kazakhstan, Myanmar, and Vietnam—all of them were completely abandoned by the Communist Party. Therefore, the Taiwan issue is not a territorial problem, nor is it about unification or independence, and it’s not about economics or technology either. The only reason the Communist Party wants to take Taiwan is because Taiwan’s very existence highlights the evil of the Communist Party’s dictatorship.
During a press conference on Wednesday, a Providence-area radio host, Chas Calenda, directly confronted Brown University officials and law enforcement with information he has received about the school intentionally disabling surveillance systems due to DEI concerns.
The response from university officials and the Providence Mayor indicate Mr. Chas Calenda’s informed accusation and question is directly on target.
In addition to information we previously shared {GO DEEP} reflecting requests from various “civil rights” and “humanitarian” groups who demanded Brown University disable their surveillance system, additional information about the issue comes via the Rhode Island ACLU making the same demand in October of this year [SEE HERE].
Brown University was under pressure from far-left groups as an outcome of concern the CCTV and school security system would be used by federal authorities to (a) identify radical leftists expressing antisemitic sentiments, and (b) identify the immigration status of persons on campus. It is not just isolated to Brown University.
Multiple municipal governments, private and municipal agencies have received the same demand in an ongoing effort to block Immigration and Customs Enforcement operations. The mass shooting on Brown University is leading to a larger public awareness of an issue that has been spreading rapidly in the last several months.
Brown University and Providence police have $8 billion liability reasons to be less than honest with the alarmed public. The political ramifications of the story are also complicating the issue for Brown University, as well as local and national figures.
This video is from 2021 and well illustrates my point. The children, ages 8-12, are being detained for picking flowers and wild vegetables near their homes. That alone will affect them emotionally, but how many of them are going to be lobotomized? Not saying that has happened to these kids, but psychosurgery is a very simple way to subdue an entire population if enough of the children and young people are maimed. Put on your strongest realist hat and realize how effective this strategy is, especially when done over several generations. I bet there are few authoritarian states with hated minorities who are not doing this. ABN
The advantage of seeing humans as networks is we can say interesting things about them parsimoniously.
A network is an organization of parts that are all connected.
Humans are networks of language. It is quite easy to see that language is a kind of network. Words connect in many ways and any word can be added to an existing network without difficulty. One word is defined by other words and we understand how it is used by how it functions among other words.
Humans are networks of semiotics. Semiotics function and are networked much like words, though a single semiotic may require many words to describe.
Meaning or what things mean is another network that is a fundamental part of being human. Meaning can be expressed in words, it can be apprehended through semiotic analyses, and it very often has a strong emotional component.
Emotions are another network that is fundamental to humanness. Emotions are often not as easily analyzed as the other networks since they can be vague, changeable, and based on complexities that are difficult to see while the emotion is happening. I am pretty sure that most, if not all, complex emotions are socially determined. Since semiotics are by definition communicative, the emotional aspect of all semiotics is a major aspect of both the semiotic and emotional networks. For this reason, emotions are often best analyzed through their accompanying semiotics.
Humans also have biological networks, perceptual networks, chemical and electrical networks.
All of these networks are hooked up with each other and all of them send signals internally and to the other networks.
If we conceive of a single human being as being a vast network that includes all of the above mentioned networks and others that have not been mentioned (aesthetic, gustatory, sexual, etc.), we can see that that vast network that is all of the other networks must have a basic need to be unified.
The biology must cohere and be healthy and the mind and feelings that exist together with that biology must be unconfused enough to guide the biology toward what it needs to maintain itself.
The cognitive networks (language, semiotics, feeling, reason, etc.) must have a strong tendency to forming basic conclusions about the world around them.
For example, all humans live in fundamentally uncertain circumstances. We don’t know when we will die, what happens after we die, how stable our social lives are, our economics, our biology, and so forth. To function, our cognitive network(s) must have a basic answer to the question of uncertainty. Here are some ways that people answer or respond to the fundamentally uncertain nature of human existence:
Many just declare that this is how it is. People like this might say, “Life is tough and you gotta do what you gotta do ’cause that’s how it is.” Or, “I growed up poor so I gots to be rich now and that just how it is.”Answers of this sort, while not complex, can be very motivating. I am sure that many conventionally “successful” people deal with uncertainty on terms like these.
For many, religion, science, or philosophy answers this question. “God said so.” “Science has shown that.” “Do as thou wilt.”
Another common response is “No one has ever been able to answer that question, so I am going to ignore it and get all I can because you only live once.”
In my limited experience (wish it were more limited), a good many alcoholics love the feeling of being sure or of knowing how things are. Booze activates an easy confidence of this sort and can even be charming in an occasional drunk. By the time booze is an addiction, though, this form of confidence becomes a bad habit, declining in charm as the cognitive functions are eroded by the alcohol.
In cultures that have a belief in rebirth, the question of uncertainty is often answered by what happened in the past or resolved by what might happen in the next life.
Some people deal with this question by focusing entirely on one thing—their career, their children, their nation, their business, etc.
Some deal with it by facing it and finding that nearly everything produces a sense of wonder because hardly anything is known for sure. Others feel anxiety by facing it. Others anger or frustration.
I am sure that readers can add many more examples of how humans deal with fundamental existential uncertainty. What I find most interesting in thinking in this way is you don’t need to imagine a person’s ego or wonder too much about how or why their emotions developed as they did. You really just need to ask them how they deal with uncertainty and they will tell you.
The vast cognitive and biological networks of individual humans often can be understood as being based on a simple answer to a simple question like that.
Since psychological explanations are the coin of the realm today, many people will confuse themselves and others by further adding long stories about the development of their personality or how their parents treated them. These factors can be interesting and are real, to a point, but it is much simpler and more profitable to focus directly at the answer/response to the basic question of life’s uncertainty. A major bias or unifying principle of the human network can be found in a straightforward answer to that question.
Beyond this basic question discussed above, there are many other questions we can ask about a particular human network. Is the network closed or is it open? Is it complex or simple? Is it independent of social definitions/constraints or dependent on them? How well does it see itself, understand itself? Does it perceive other networks or does it see other people as two-dimensional aspects of its own network? Is it willing to interface with other human networks in complex ways or only in simple conventional or established ways? Is it secretive? Does it see the vastness of the networks outside and beyond itself? Does it see how it is connected to them?
The advantage of analyzing humans as networks is it avoids many of the ambiguities of psychological analysis. Rather than focus on such dubious concepts as personality, ego, the subconscious, or self, a network analysis simply asks how is the network functioning. From a network point of view, a personality or self is little more than a focal point, a unifying principle that provides an illusion of certainty where there need not be one and cannot really be one. A human can function perfectly well without an ego, self, or well-defined personality. Indeed, there is greater stability in seeing yourself as a complex network that is always open to analysis and always willing to add or remove parts as they show themselves to be either good or bad.
After basic network questions have been asked and answered, I think the best starting point for a more detailed analysis is an examination of semiotics and how they are functioning in the individual’s life, and especially in their communications with others. This is best done through FIML practice.
In this context, as in so many, it is important to remember that humans are entry-level conscious semiotic animals. As such, we are prone to processing semiotics with the abrupt and often violent instincts of animals. A network approach provides specificity (what semiotic are we talking about), malleability (oh, I didn’t mean that), an appreciation for the functionality of network nodes, what they are doing and how or why. Since FIML partners have a prior agreement to do analyses of this sort, it is fairly easy for them to segue from ordinary conversation to analysis of that conversation and then back to the ordinary conversation.
I highly recommend these two videos. They provide an excellent explanation of Buddhist philosophy or world view without ever mentioning Buddhism.
The ‘small self’ of Buddhism is Kastrup’s ‘dissociated entity inside a Markov Blanket’. Kastrup’s ‘mind at large’ is Buddhist ‘ultimate reality’, ‘the Tathagata’, the ‘Buddha mind’, ‘enlightenment’, etc. The ‘doings’ of the entity inside the Markov blanket are karma. In this sense, those doings, or that karma (work), perpetuate a series of ‘rebirths’ rather than reincarnations. The Noble Eightfold Path is a concise way of describing the behaviors that lead to full realization of ‘mind at large’ or enlightenment.
Two of the (falsely understood) most ‘negative’ things in Buddhism are nicely cleared up in Kastrup’s description. The first is the mistaken notion that ‘nirvana’ or the ‘cessation of suffering’ is the cessation of being itself. Nirvana is ‘merely’ the return of the small self to ‘mind at large’, or the enlightenment of the small self to Buddha nature or ultimate reality. The second is karma is some kind of punishment administered by some kind of god thing. Karma is much more what Kastrup calls ‘doings’ and is simply a way to describe how what we do affects what we become.
I want to add that Nathan Hawkins does a wonderful job of interviewing Kastrup. He contributes a great deal to this conversation, which overall is not only a good description of Buddhism (without ever mentioning Buddhism) but also an excellent example of how people should talk. At one point, Hawkins says he wants to create a something like a ‘proto-religion’ that does not rely on ‘sacred texts’. He also says he wants philosophy to be more in touch with people’s lives as they are really lived. I like that a lot. It’s basically what basic Buddhism already is.
The Buddha said he was just a man; that he should not be worshiped; that his words are not sacred; that his teachings should be conveyed mind-to-mind (as in the videos above) and not turned into scared texts; and that each of us should make the teachings our own; learn them in our own languages and convey them to others generously when and if they want to hear them. I bet the Buddha would thoroughly enjoy and approve of the discussion above.
In a deeply Buddhist sense, there is no need for a Buddhist tradition. The whole thing could be thrown away and recreated. But why bother? Buddhism today is not a clinging to some sacred past or god-like figure, but a present iteration of a long tradition (which is largely philosophical) that dates back 2,500 years to the Sage of the Scythians, Shakyamuni Buddha. Watch the videos above and see what you think. ABN
UPDATE: I do not want to detract at all from Kastrup’s vision, but would like to say that, imo, Mind at Large or Ultimate Reality is much more like Mahayana on steroids than the philosophically guarded position Kastrup holds. He himself says he is conservative and sticks to ordinary interpretations like time and space and probably the existence of other civilizations and realms. I appreciate that he does that and why. Another point worth mentioning is the Markov Blanket each of us is ensconced in is surely semi-permeable. In that sense, a great deal of religious practice, including especially the samadhi states in Buddhism, can be understood as ways to make the Markov Blanket more permeable, to invite Mind at Large into our little cocoons. Prayer and religious ritual do that as well as does calling on God or practicing the presence of God. Moral actions, no matter how they are understood, that make us receptive to powers much greater than us are fundamental to human being and our comprehension of who and where we are. If we can comprehend Mind at Large viewing our lives through our eyes and senses, we can also comprehend having a very rich relationship with Mind at Large. In Buddhist terms, that might be described as us being drawn to the Tathagata to the point of never wanting to turn back. ABN
The actual purpose of a creed is to provide a doctrinal statement of correct belief or orthodoxy. The creeds of Christianity have been drawn up at times of conflict about doctrine: acceptance or rejection of a creed served to distinguish believers and deniers of particular doctrines. For that reason, a creed was called in Greek a σύμβολον (symbolon), which originally meant half of a broken object which, when fitted to the other half, verified the bearer’s identity.[9] The Greek word passed through Latin symbolum into English “symbol”, which only later took on the meaning of an outward sign of something. (link)
Someone sent this to me, believing I might find it interesting which I do.
Our word symbol started out as a very concrete concept. It makes sense that it would come from something more basic than itself and with a much narrower meaning.
It’s also quite beautiful that a symbol only works as intended when it connects more or less as intended with the mind of its receiver(s). As with a symbolon, all symbols that work must have at least two functioning halves, a sender and a receiver.
This is a basic part of the definition of semiotics; that a message always has a sender and receiver, though in semiotics it is well-recognized that the receiver often receives the message differently than the sender intended.
If a symbol falls in the woods and no one perceives it is it still a symbol?
I’m a chinese from a rural village in Southern China. I stumbled upon this Sub and found that lot of people here never actual been to China, less likely they have been to rural China, which still take up most part of china. so I want to share what I’ve seen and heard over the last thirty years to show you a slice of the rural China—in real life. Not very good in English, please excuse the grammar mistakes.
I grew up in a small village in Southern China. a bit isolated. The population merely past 1,000. Everyone in the village have the same surname. As a kid, I thought the whole world had the same surname until like 7 or 8 years old, when a girl with a different surname move to our village, this thing reshaped my worldview, like, “there is actual other people outside our village?”
Beside being isolated, the village was dirt-Poor.
How poor? We had no Flush Toilet, no, no Flush Toilet, no underground pipe system. Every household had two big buckets. one for the liquid human waste, one for the solid waste, Aka fecal. when the liquid waste bucket was full, we took it out to the fields to water the crops. When the poop bucket was full, well, some with morality will carry it to a public pit. some would just dump it onto the street. one thing I learn about poverty, if you can’t afford food, you can’t afford morality. so, most go to the street.
so as a school child, commuting to school took extreme caution, you never knew what you may step on. the worse thing is, when it rain, the alley would became a small river of fecal and piss, you had to walk like a ballet dancer to avoid them.
The hygiene was bad, the education was worse. We had one class, one teacher. The teacher was short, we nickname him Mr shorttie, Mr shorttie only finished middle school, that already crown him the most educated person in the village. He taught writing, Math, and sport, basically everything. Mr shorttie had like six daughters, he beated his wife a lot because she can’t gave him a son to carry his blood line.
When I was in 6th grade, the government said we had to learn English. But Mr shorttie only knew the 26 letters of the alphabet. So, He only teach the alphabet.
Mr shorttie had three teaching skills: the Belt whip, the Face slap, and the knee Kick. personally, I think the last one hurt the most.
Our school was just a brick house with a tile roof. When it rained, it leaked. Once, a typhoon took down a tree onto the roof, tiles rained down and smashed two kids. the school had no money to hire cleaners, so they hire us intead, zero pay, of course. We spent like a week to clean up the rubble.
First, the defense conflict: Michael Burt (high-profile SF attorney) is directly related to Terryl Farnsworth (the TPUSA AV guy who yanked SD cards post-hit and contaminated the scene). Michael is on Tyler Robinson’s legal team—despite family loyalty to the very insiders with access to Charlie’s stage setup. This is a blatant conflict of interest. How can Tyler get a fair trial when his own lawyer is tied to suspects who controlled audio, cameras, and evidence? It’s screaming setup—Tyler’s being railroaded as the patsy while real players skate.
Next, the aviation link: Terryl’s father-in-law Duane Burt held top executive roles at Duncan Aviation (Utah facility)—where those Egyptian-registered planes (flagged in Charlie’s threats and pre-attack searches) were located the day of the execution. Duane’s expertise and connections in elite aviation circles put this family smack in the middle of the “Egyptian planes” mystery. Coincidence? Or direct access to the tools needed for a sophisticated hit?
The bigger picture: The Farnsworth-Burt clan is embedded in Utah’s powerful “Mormon Mafia”—intermarried elite families (often sharing polygamous pioneer roots) who dominate politics, business, and institutions in Mormon-heavy states. Known for insider networks, loyalty to establishment figures like the Romneys, and quiet control over key sectors—these aren’t random players; they’re connected old-guard protecting their own.
This web—TPUSA insiders, defense sabotage, aviation anomalies, Mormon power ties—proves the fix is in. No way it’s all coincidence.
The above link provides an informative video and a great deal of apparently relevant information to Tyler Robinson’s defense team and the kinds of military-grade weapons and communication devices that may have been used in Kirk’s murder.
I am posting this under ‘information’ and ‘speculation’ for readers who know more about Utah than I do. This material comes from Project Constitution who has previously uncovered reliable information on the Kirk murder. ABN
DEFENDING AMERICA FROM A CHEMICAL WEAPON: Today, President Donald J. Trump signed an Executive Order designating illicit fentanyl and its core precursor chemical as weapons of mass destruction (WMD).
The Order directs the Attorney General to immediately pursue criminal charges, sentencing enhancements, and sentencing variances in fentanyl trafficking cases.
The Order directs the Secretary of State and the Secretary of the Treasury to pursue appropriate actions against relevant assets and financial institutions for those involved in or supporting the manufacture, distribution, and sale of illicit fentanyl and its core precursor chemicals.
The Order directs the Secretary of War and Attorney General to determine whether the Department of War should provide enhanced national security resources to the Department of Justice as necessary during an emergency situation involving a weapon of mass destruction.
The Order directs the Secretary of War, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, to update their chemical incident response-related directives to include the fentanyl threat.
The Order directs the Secretary of Homeland Security to identify fentanyl smuggling networks using WMD and nonproliferation related threat intelligence.
STOPPING FENTANYL FROM POISONING OUR PEOPLE: President Trump is unleashing every available tool against the cartels and foreign networks that have turned fentanyl into the leading cause of death for Americans aged 18-45.
Illicit fentanyl is closer to a chemical weapon than a narcotic, claiming the lives of hundreds of thousands of Americans.
Just two milligrams of fentanyl—equivalent to 10-15 grains of table salt—is considered a lethal dose.
Cartels and Foreign Terrorist Organizations use fentanyl profits to fund assassinations, terrorism, and insurgencies while waging armed conflict over trafficking routes and other facets of their operations.
The potential for fentanyl to be weaponized for concentrated, large-scale terror attacks by organized adversaries is a serious threat to the United States.
By designating illicit fentanyl as a WMD, President Trump is ensuring the full weight of the Federal government is focused, coordinated, and mobilized to confront fentanyl as the deadly chemical weapon it is.
Droves of clandestine military operatives, choose their victims and attack them singly or in small groups.
Their victims are first placed on ‘lists’; then they are attacked by an operative unrelated to the person who put the victim on the list.
It is difficult to even notice a poisoning or lobotomy has occurred.
And close to impossible to catch the perpetrator(s).
You cannot understand military strategy or history or the world we live in today without understanding how savage and secretive military strategies can be.
There are numerous intellectuals who decry the fall of the West based on ‘pathological altruism’ (true enough), the ‘nepotism’ of our enemies (true enough), ‘infiltration’ into Western societal high-ground (true enough).
But none of them, so far, has the street-smarts to see the highly consequential and lethal battle being waged covertly against our most promising young people, including our children. ABN
American Buddhist Net 