On Apr 29, 12:29=A0pm, "OD" <Ya...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> ltl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> > On Apr 29, 11:36 am, "OD" <Ya...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >> ltl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> >>> On Apr 29, 9:54 am, "OD" <Ya...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >>>> ltl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> >>>>> On Apr 29, 6:02 am, "OD" <Ya...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >>>>>> CharlesLiu wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Apr 28, 7:25 pm, Raymond <ni...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 15:37:37 -0700 (PDT), bmo...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Apr 28, 3:30?pm, "ltl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
" <ltl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> On Apr 28, 1:31?am, Lproud...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 27, 7:03?pm, CharlesLiu <chliu...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> It happened agin. First it was petite children's TV show
> >>>>>>>>>>>> host Konnie Huq ?in London, then it's crippled paralympian
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Jin Jin - now a 17 year old Japanese table tennis olympian
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Ai Fukuhara, who trains in China and has been a good will
> >>>>>>>>>>>> ambassador for Japan and China, was jumpped by a Tibetan
> >>>>>>>>>>>> from Taiwan:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>http://www.anti-cnn.com/forum/cn/thread-38991-1-1.html
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Why don't you people pick on someone yor own size, instead
> >>>>>>>>>>>> of going after little girls? One legged little girles too?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Man, you people must fee real brave.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>> What do you expect from the spokeman of Voice of Tibet.
> >>>>>>>>>>> Attacking handicap girl in wheel chair is FANTASTIC.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=3Dd9Amlz2Jvro
>
> >>>>>>>>>> A lot of these Tibetan exiles are misguided. Many of these
> >>>>>>>>>> folks have never been in Tibet. The Tibet on their mind is
> >>>>>>>>>> the real Tibet. Yet they think they are better than the
> >>>>>>>>>> millions of real Tibetans in Tibet. Their means is also odd.
>
> >>>>>>>>>> Recently, I begin to think they are not responding to the
> >>>>>>>>>> needs of the real Tibetans. These exiles are a frustrated
> >>>>>>>>>> bunch. And they are responding to what have bappened in the
> >>>>>>>>>> west. ?Since China ba****ng is becoming fahsionable, they
> >>>>>>>>>> just want to be at the center of this China and Chinese
> >>>>>>>>>> ba****ng party. Hence they will do all sorts of strange
> >>>>>>>>>> things to attract attention. Luckily, they can also get some
> >>>>>>>>>> money from westrn countries.
>
> >>>>>>>>>> What the spokeman of Vocie of Tibet siad is revealing. His
> >>>>>>>>>> calculation is not about Tibet. His primarily concern is
> >>>>>>>>>> about international publicity. However, the Tibet problem is
> >>>>>>>>>> a Chinese problem. The solution may go through the Chinese
> >>>>>>>>>> poeple. However, these exiles's protest and Chinese ba****ng
> >>>>>>>>>> are carried out to enrage the Chinese poeple ?and make their
> >>>>>>>>>> goal further and further away. A new development in China is
> >>>>>>>>>> that some now said it openly "Anyone who negotiates with the
> >>>>>>>>>> DL clique is a traitor."
>
> >>>>>>>>> It seems that even the poor one-legged fencer is now being
> >>>>>>>>> branded a traitor by many Chinese. Funny how people on this NG
> >>>>>>>>> talk a lot about how mean a few people in France were to her
> >>>>>>>>> but keep quiet about what Chinese are doing to her. You guys
> >>>>>>>>> sure have a lot of double standards...
>
> >>>>>>>>> "Someone goes to France once and thinks
> >>>>>>>>> she's French. Jin Jing speaks with the voice of an utterly
> >>>>>>>>> brainless evil-eyed wolf traitor."
>
> >>>>>>>> Nothing but the disinformation service of your western
> >>>>>>>> propaganda
>
> >>>>>>> You bet. There was a minority voice critical to Jin Jin, but the
> >>>>>>> majority voice of reason in China blogsphere has came out in
> >>>>>>> sup****t of her.
>
> >>>>>>> Of course China hater like BO would rather ignore that:
>
>
>>>>>>>http://www.google.com/search?q=3D%E9%87%91%E6%99%B6+%E6%B1%89%E5%A5=
%B8
>
> >>>>>>> =93Jin Jin does not sup****t Carfore boycott=94
> >>>>>>> =93If Jin Jin can be labeled HJ, who can=92t?=94
> >>>>>>> =93Why call Jin Jin HJ?=94
> >>>>>>> =93Nationalist =93Boxers=94 call Jin Jin HJ=94
> >>>>>>> =93Shocked to see Jin Jin labeled HJ=94
> >>>>>>> =93Jin Jin=92s one sentence turning her into HJ, sending chill
up
> >>>>>>> readers spine=94
> >>>>>>> =93Calling Jin Jing HJ is the first sign of the world gone
wrong.=
=94
> >>>>>>> =93Jin Jin from hero to zero(HJ) - a Chinese farce=94
> >>>>>>> =93defaming [Jin Jin] is not patriotism=94
> >>>>>>> =93Jin Jin from hero to zero - patriotism has lost its wit=94
>
> >>>>>>> This proves China haters like to twist the facts to suit their
> >>>>>>> anti- Chinese agenda. When they attack the ordinary Chinese
> >>>>>>> netters as irrational, rabid - it is no longer about the Chinese
> >>>>>>> government is it?
>
> >>>>>> What's the agenda of those that claim pro-Tibetans are cowards
> >>>>>> who only attack little girls?- Hide quoted text -
>
> >>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>
> >>>>> You are comparing apples and oranges.
> >>>>> "Free Tibet" is a movement sup****ted by CIA/NED an dother quasi
> >>>>> government agencies money. The Tibetan exiles' activities are goal
> >>>>> directed. Concerning the attack, another netter had point out, the
> >>>>> spoken persion stating in public that such attack the defenseless
> >>>>> girl was good. That is, good for publicity. Hence, the attack was
> >>>>> a mean to an end subordinated to thier pay masters' wish.
>
> >>>>> The bigger issue, attacking the girl as well as the overall effort
> >>>>> to disrupt the Olympic torch relay or the Olympic games do not in
> >>>>> anyway benefit the Tibetans in Tibet. China will not give up their
> >>>>> legitimate claim on Tibet simply because of theartics peformed by
> >>>>> a small number of people.
>
> >>>> How can you even say apples and oranges when you completely fail to
> >>>> grasp what is being compared. It's the posters bmoore and
> >>>> CharlesLiu and their agendas. If CharlesLiu thinks bmoore has an
> >>>> agenda of demonizing Chinese then by the same standard he is
> >>>> obviously guilty of demonizing Tibetans.
>
> >>> Again, Lui and BM are not comparable because the evidence they used
> >>> are of different. In one case, the attack of the defenseless girl is
> >>> lauded by the Vocie of Tibet spokeperson as something good because
> >>> such attack promote international publicity. Implaction: The attack
> >>> is part of the plan and/or the attack conform to their overall goal
> >>> to gain publicity. There is no comparable spokeperson and
> >>> comparable plan for the verbal attack on the same girl by netter
> >>> who may or may not be Chinese or pro-China.
>
> >> If you are not going to address the obvious attempt at demonization
> >> of Tibetans by Charlesliu with the words, "Pro-Tibet cowards only
> >> attack little girls" then there is nothing further to discuss.
>
> > If one has problem with the post by Charles Liu, he or she should feel
> > free to criticize him.
>
> Which is what I did!
Not true. Your first post of this thread is the following.
"What's the agenda of those that claim pro-Tibetans are cowards who
only
attack little girls?"
You are respoinding to Liu saying those who verbal attacked Jin are
having an agenda.
> > My previous post simply pointed out one cannot
> > compare the attack by Tibetans and the verbal attack by bloggers from
> > Chinese websites.
>
> Then what you said had nothing to do with what I said, and you're
wasting =
my
> time.
Are you saying that the above question from the first post is not a
way to compare the pro-Tibetans attack little girl and netters
verbally attack Jin?
>
> >>>> Something you seem to also be willing to take part on, even when
> >>>> you claim others are doing it to the Chinese.
>
> >>> China ba****ng or anything ba****ng is a matter of whether the
> >>> criticism is from a position of fact and logic. Let me lay out my
> >>> case against the "free tibet" sup****ters.
>
> >> People can use "facts" and "logic" to demonize others. You know it,
> >> since you try to do it all the time.
>
> > How so?
>
> See your words below.
If you don't agree with something, please be specific.
> >>> 1. According to what I know, most of the "free tibet" sup****ters
> >>> including the exiles themselves have never set foot in Tibet.
> >>> Logical inference: Their conception of Tibet is quite different
> >>> from the real Tibet. The above conclusion is also the view of
> >>> Orville Schell, the author of "VIRTUAL TIBET," according to his
> >>> expereince iwth the exiles.
>
> >>> 2. Since the sup****ters' protests were not grounded on what have
> >>> happened in the real Tibet, their activities have to be triggered by
> >>> something outside of Tibet rather than from events inside of Tibet.
> >>> In this case, protests and publicty stunts were planned and carried
> >>> from outside of Tibet. There has been no evidence of peaceful
> >>> ****test inside of Tibet. The western media had to falsify
> >>> information to rectify the lack of evidence. They used the video
> >>> footage in which Nepalese policemen were beating Tibetan protestors
> >>> as evidence to prove that peaceful protests had occured in Tibet
> >>> and they were suppressed.
>
> >> A quote was recently published here of SAC from a Canadian tourist
> >> that said days of peaceful demonstrations took place before the
> >> rioting. You can find it in the "let them have a national
> >> referendum" thread.
>
> > The lack of objective evidences like pictures and video clip had been
> > raised for several weeks. If you think the Canadian tourist would
> > change the situation, please post the link.
>
> "I want to make one thing clear because all of the major news outlet
> are ignoring a very im****tant fact. Yes the chinese government bears a
> huge amount of blame for this situation. But the protests yesterday
> were NOT peaceful. The original protests from the past few days may
> have been, but all of the eyewitnesses in this room agree the
> protestors yesterday went from attacking Chinese police to attacking
> innocent people very very quickly. They appeared to target Muslim and
> Han Chinese individuals and businesses first but many Tibetans were
> also caught in the crossfire."
Too bad he did not give more details on what were these "original
protests from the past few days." For instance, who were protesting
against whom and for what reasons. Wihtout the information, how could
one tell a protest is a protest? May be you can provide the original
link.
>
>
>
> >>> 3. It is obvious that the sup****ters' publicity stunts go nowhere,
> >>> as expected, except enraging many Chinese people inside and outside
> >>> of China. The results beg the question: "Why the publicity stunts
> >>> which could not furtehr their avowed goal?" Two answers: First, as
> >>> suggested by the beginning post of this thread, the 'free tibet'
> >>> sup****ters are cowards, they dare not do anythings besides stunts
> >>> like attacking little girl. Second, they need to stunsts and the
>
> ...
>
> read more =BB- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
|
