Yao Ming Rejected for Taiwan Charity Visit, China Times Reports

It's a government in exile ON CHINA's land with no legitmacy on the mainland of China, otherwise you'd be forced to call the occupation of the ROC regime of Taiwan a foreign invasion, which is obviously ridiculous.

 

Having a say is only one way, BUT NOT THE ONLY WAY. Blocking you out of your house and disabling your ability to repair it doesn't deprive you of your ownship. According to your absurd logic that sovereignty belongs to only policy maker regardless of the policy maker's legitmacy, it would be easy to rob countries off their land, just by occupying part of it and therefore making the invader/segregator the policy maker.

 

Of course it means something, at least in America. We have much different sentences for people that commit 100 murders than for people that commit one. For example, in California I believe you can get the death penalty for killing two people, but just killing one person the maximum sentence is life imprisonment. There is nothing hypocritical about Scott Peterson criticizing the holocaust. Just like there is nothing hypocritical about a jaywalker criticizing a rapist. Criticizing people that have done worse than you is the normal state of affairs. Criticizing people that have done less than or equal to your bad deeds is hypocrisy.

I think I am an American citizen posting on an American message board. I don't know how your communist bosses feel about it, but over here we can criticize whoever we want, even the president of the United States. It's called freedom of speech and is one of the many reasons America is better than China.

I already covered this. They could all be peaceful virgin daffodil sniffers and I can call them whatever I want. That the majority of the Chinese have had the wool pulled over their eyes with regard to Mao does not mean I am disallowed from pointing out their hypocrisy. You are welcome to disagree with my assessment, but you would be wrong.

According to this theory, the president of Taiwan is the head of state for all of Taiwan and the PRC. I don't think that you believe this, so it is simply more semantics. Taiwan, under every reasonable measure is an independent nation. The PRC can call it whatever they want, but until the people of Taiwan decide to give their country to China, they are two different countries.

You are right about one thing, it is common sense. All common sense indicators are that Taiwan is not a part of China. That China claims Taiwan and that the official name of Taiwan is the Republic of China are the only pieces of evidence to the contrary.

I know, but it was poorly executed and I wanted to show that.

That excuse MIGHT fly for the famine deaths, but it carries no weight for the millions killed in purges and the Cultural Revolution. Mao == Stalin lite.

 

The Koreans don't make nearly as much fuss though. But you know what, the problems you have is how Japan handles it's history. As someone pointed out, China covers up the nasty things it has done, the communist party executed thousands of people, how come that's not in the books?

Personally, I hope the Communist Party's hold does give way and we get to see a more open Chinese society. A nation with such history and that has contributed so much to humankind deserves a better gov't.

 

I suspect you were too busy hysterically thumping your chest about how wronged China has been. Excuse me if I think that the deliberate attempt to exterminate an entire people, damn near accomplished, is worse than the horrific things that happened to the Chinese people. One could say that is splitting hairs, and I wouldn't blame them, if they don't share my view, but it is my opinion. If you are obsessed with numbers, we should be discussing what Germany did to the people of the Soviet Union, who lost more than anyone. We could be discussing what happened to the Gypsies, who suffered as the Jews did, but in fewer numbers. Japan didn't set out to exterminate the Chinese people. There is a fundamental difference in what they did, as horrific as it was, and what the Nazis damn near accomplished. In my opinion. It's also my opinion that to argue over comparisons between inhuman acts during warfare, things that occurred within the memory of people still living, or those we knew who passed away, demeans what happened, and demeans us all. This is not ancient history, by any means. Not stuff from dusty texts, although I love reading those "dusty texts." That these acts still stir strong emotions is perfectly understandable.

As for what I think of the way Japan has treated the WWII era in their history texts, or how they have refused to give unambiguous apologies to all those harmed by their actions in that period, not only the Chinese, or anything like adequate reparations, unlike Germany, which might be a model for national contrition over heinous acts of the past, you could actually read my posts, if you can keep the foam flying from your mouth out of your eyes. With all due respect. And if you think these topics haven't been read by Jewish members of the board, you would be mistaken. Whether they choose to reply is their business.



D&D. Impeach Bush and His Buddy.

 

This may be a new concept for you but when I say something like, "Every dog has his day" you don't need to fight me because I am calling you a dog. I am likening the common aspects of two unrelated situations. This is fairly commonplace linguistically.

To provide another example, when reporters were asking questions to George Allen and he responded by calling someone "Macaca", that was not the fault of the reporters asking the questions. And just to be clear here, in case you haven't gotten the gist of how it works yet, I am not comparing China to a senator from Virginia or describing the people of Japan as the American Press Corps either. If this still is confusing to you, I suggest you read the Wikipedia articles on analogy and metaphor.

Now as far as the nature of my questions, I often ask these questions as a way to establish that people are commonly people. For instance, if a Muslim who is becoming belligerent in a way that is disturbing to me about the way the Israelis treat the Palestinians I will say something along the lines of, "It would seem that a logical end result would be to kill all the Jews in Palestine, right?" Normally these questions result in a stepping back and recognition that Jews are people and consideration must be given to them as human beings, just as they are arguing that it should be given to Palestinians. The idea of genocide is normally enough to make people recoil and take a more circumspect view. Apparently not you. Genuinely you are the first person who has ever responded as you did. The idea of committing genocide is apparently not sufficiently abhorrent for you.

Now, how did the Japanese do what they did in China? They thought of only the Japanese as people. There was no consideration for the Chinese. They only concerned themselves with Japan and the people of Japan and what was viewed as best for them.

A contract is not a contract unless it provides consideration for both parties. Your responses show me that you are only interested in the considerations from the Chinese point of view. You believe that keeping the Mongolians and the Japanese as helpless serfs is an appropriate solution. You are using the same absolutist ethnocentric philosophy that enabled the Japanese to not care about chopping off the head of Chinese.

Additionally, by bringing up the idea that the Mongolians aren't strong enough to be a threat and the Japanese are, so you should be afraid of the Japanese but not the Mongolians you show the clear subtext that this is as much about two dogs who always growl and bark at each other over who gets to be the alpha dog, or the pack leader as it is about the affront of the absence of the apology. And just in case you still don't understand, I am not calling Japan and China dogs, either.

So accuracy of facts is irrelevant? If I actually believed that you believed that it might make many things about your positions much more clear. If details don't matter then you should have no problem with the details of the official Japanese apologies that you do have a problem with.

No he didn't. He said:

Since Panda was able to acknowledge this subtle point and not feel it was in any way attacking him and was able to restate it in a more clear way, I don't see why it is so difficult for you.

Panda's ability to speak logically and his clear explanation of specific terms is the only thing in this thread that I find heartening. He is able to specifically address what he wants from the Japanese, and I am able to believe that if he recieves it he will actually be happy.

Based on your responses (as well as those of several others), I believe you will continue to be disdainful of the Japanese no matter what. The only mediator of your response will be whether you need to fear and them or whether you can look down on them because they are no threat. See Austria-Hungary's ultimatum to Serbia before WWI and the way compliance with its terms mattered not at all.

 

This thread makes Baby Jesus cry on the Happy Buddha's shoulder.

 

So you are saying that a single count murderer criticizing a serial killer is not hypocritic, and that is what makes you hypocrite.

Variance in degrees makes not the shift in nature and principle. Try think about it.

It's just your opinion if America is better than China. I think China is better than America which is why I never thought about getting a green card when I was in America. You trying to using American nationalism to flame others is just pathetic. Can't win an argument and resort to "my daddy is better than your daddy" crap, grow up, son.

No, your freedom of speech is not your license to the right of calling Chinese whatever you want to, in other words, it's not your licence for your stupidity and bias. According to your thinking, Hitler can immigrate to the USA and call the Jews whatever he wants to. Don't be a disgrace to freedom of speech, please.

Let me repeat, you have the right to call people whatever you want only after your proved you are right in your assessment, so far you haven't and I don't think you can.

No, Taiwanese having ROC passport only proves Taiwan is part of China, as ROC is an illegitmate government on exile on the Island Province of Taiwan.

You are just playing semantics. The common sense is that ROC is a regime found to serve Chinese on China's land, China and Chinese own ROC.

The ROC is an illegitimate regime on exile overthrown by its Chinese people, hiding in province of Taiwan, and illegimate Chinese government on exile has no legitmacy to lay claims to the sovereignty of a piece land of China.

The world acknowledges Taiwan as part of China because they know it is. China cannot lay claims to Japan, nor Korea just because every country wants to do business with her.

 

It actually does. Thats why we give permits to KKK or Nazi groups that want to march and call all the Jews names. I could go on, but fundimentally, freedom of speech does give him that right.

Actually, without commenting on the justice or injustince of any claim it actually occurs because the PRC ends diplomatic relations for people that form relations with Taiwan - they make you choose one or the other. If you want relations with Bejing you have to reject relations with Taiwan.

They are also very active in blocking Taiwan from participating in the UN, the WHO, etc.

I have no doubt whatsoever, that if China allowed people to recognize Taiwan and still maintain relations and didn't fight it, that Taiwan would very quickly be aknowledged as a country and Taiwan and China would both be represented at the UN. Again I am only commenting on the dynamics of the situation, not the rightness of the PRC's claim or whatever.

And if you believe China is above the same thing, why do they have relations with North Korea and South Korea?

 

I agree with legally he has that right, but not socially. In the matter of his stereotype of calling Chinese hypocrites, it's social correctness that matters. Legality aside, Nazi or KKKs have no social rights to make derogative stereotype against a group of people, like what SM did. So, in my point of view, society, not government, has the right to tell them to shut up because it's offensive and inappropriate socially.

You made good points. In China's shoes though, if she allows people to recognize Taiwan and still maintain relations and didn't fight it, such allowance would be deemed as China recognizing the legality of this segregation, then naturally the segregation becomes legit because China, is willing to let go of her loss. The status quo is, China has the right to not recognize the legality the current segregation, and China is exercizing the right to fight against any attempts that justify the legality of this segregation in her territorial rights, including other countries recognizing Taiwan.

Even China is actively using diplomatic relations to protect her rights over Taiwan, China wouldn't be allowed by the international community to do so if Taiwan is not part of China, in the same sense that China cannot lay claims to Japan or Korea and succeed at it because every country want to establish diplomatic relations with China. It simply doesn't work that way.

 

A murderer can criticize a serial killer, I already covered that. It is not hypocrisy to think that exterminating all Jews is bad but controlling territory conquered in a war is not bad. The Holocaust has no relationship to the "oppression" of the Palestinians by Israel. One was the systematic elimination of a race of people. The other is the defense of one's own state. It's apples and oranges.

It's not just my opinion.

I've already destroyed you in the argument. I was just stating my opinion of the virtues of free speech and how it is a factor in the superiority of the US. I wasn't trying to flame anyone (maybe the CCP, but no individuals.) Taiwan is not part of China irrespective of the relative quality of China in comparison to the US.

If somebody hops in the Wayback machine and brings Hitler back to America, he can say whatever he wants about Jews. You think there are no people in America that say anti-Jewish things? And you thought I couldn't win an argument.

A) I have proved precisely what I claimed about the Chinese. B) If I had not, I could still say what I want. You really are having trouble with this whole free expression concept aren't you?

A passport proves nothing about the sovereignty of a nation. Taiwan is functionally an independent nation. No matter how many times you point out that it used to be part of China, or that it has the word China in it's name, or that the people who founded it were Chinese, none of that will ever make it a part of the PRC. There are two ways Taiwan can be a part of China. First, they can decide to reunify with China. Second, China can invade and make it a part of China. Until one of those happens, Taiwan is it's own country.

America was founded to serve British, on Britain's land. That amounts to squat as far as Britain having a claim on America.

Technically, the ROC is the legitimate regime and the PRC are the rebels. The communists overthrew the legitimate government of China and replaced it with the PRC. Regardless, the government of Taiwan has no control of the mainland and the government of the PRC has no control of Taiwan. They are two seperate and distinct countries, one of which broke off from the other.

Only in the delusions of the PRC. Everyone else recognizes that China bullies people into agreeing with them and refusing to recognize Taiwan. If China said they would treat everyone the same regardless of any countries views on Taiwan, every country in the world would probably recognize Taiwan tomorrow.

 

What millions killed in purges and cultural revolution? Do you even know what cultural revolution was about?

 

I don't think the oppression is just about protecting their territory. It has been discussed here how there are laws that aren't security based at all, but still are based purely on ethnicity. Keeping the Palestinians in an apartheid or worse type system isn't just about protecting their own state.

 

Setting aside the veracity of your argument, even if we view all of it from your perspective, would you agree that it bears no resemblance to the holocaust and as such it's perpetrators could still have a leg to stand on in decrying the holocaust?

It was largely about Mao consolidating his power in the wake of the Great Leap Forward. I have provided links before to all of this stuff, but estimates for deaths in the Cultural Revolution range from as low as 50,000 to as high as 20M. Political purges likewise have a range with a median value of about 2M. Then there are the labor camps with estimated death tolls above 10M. Including famine deaths, Mao is probably responsible for the deaths of more people than anyone else in the history of the world. Excluding famine deaths he is more on a par with Hitler and well behind Stalin.

 

You are just repeating nonsense. A murderer cannot criticize a serial killer without being called a hypocrite himself, obvioulsy it's a foreign concept to someone like you.

So I think the whole Muslims world agree with your opinion.

I'm talking about various type of rights here but I guess you don't realize it yet. There's difference between legal rights of freedom of speech and social rights. Legally you have the right to say whatever you want to without facing legal repercussions. Socially you don't have the right to call people whatever you want without facing potential social repercussions. A man doesn't have the social right to make derogative statement like you did. If a KKK member says bad things about blacks, he may be facing being laid off by his black employer, which is the employer's social right to exact "punishment", and society have the right to respect such social right of the black employer because KKK or people like you have no social right to express your radical views.

You are contradicting yourself with a lack of common sense, a passport is part of functionality of a regime.

The difference is, the constitution of ROC says it is found to serve China, and that constitution is still in effect today.

With your usual lack of common sense, you seem to not realize that when a legit government was overthrown by its people, it becomes not legit.

Gosh, you are so repetitive it's ad nausem. So exactly how the PRC bullied the USA, Japan, Korea, British, France, Germany, Spain, Italy, Austrailia, Canada ... into agreeing with her undisputable right over Taiwan? LOL. You are desperately grasping at straws.

 

Your assumption was wrong. I was born in Shanghai, and according to general consensus, we Shanghainese don't have the courage to thump our chests to make a point.

You are entitled to your own opinion, and you don't need to apologize for your free speech on a free board in a free country. I would simply categorize that apology to the same kind as Japanese officials saying they were sorry that they brought inconvenience to other Asian people in WWII, before and after they continue to honor war criminals.

However, you don't have the right to act like a powerful judge to decide whether Chinese people have rights to compare Holocaust with Rape of Nanking. It's absolutely wrong to pretend that you feel offended on behalf of Jewish people, while NO posters with Jewish background has ever expressed that they were offended when Chinese people made the comparison. You were actually the one who’s mistaken, if you believe Jewish people will keep their silence, when they feel there is attempt to downplay Holocaust,. There was never short of such occurrence in the past, even on this very board. In those threads involving Iranian Leader and Middle East conflict etc, I saw strong opinions from them to confront such attempts, and I admire such actions. Like I said, in those 10 to 20 long threads discussing Rape of Nanking, no such objection raised from posters with Jewish background. Common sense tells us, that a comparison between two of the most horrific events in modern time, happened at same time, done by different group of people, to different people, does not offend them. Because they are honest, mature, and sensitive enough to know that such comparison was by no means an attempt to compare who suffered more, but simple an outcry to the world to provide more context of the nature of such horrific history events. People who suffered greatly understand other’s suffering. It brought me no pleasure to describe those heinous acts from Japanese invaders. While Holocaust is wildly known to Western people, Rape of Nanking was never a welcomed topic, especially on this board, due to its involvement of Red China and “peace-loving” westernized Japan.

I don’t know how you drew the conclusion that I was obsessed with numbers. I did mention the number of 6 million and 20 million; however, I also brought up the cruelty, the systematic raping and killing, the well-planed human live biomedical experiment, most inhumane killing exercises and training etc. Those actions were never done to American POWs, nor to other people in occupied lands during the same time, including Korea and other Asian countries. You said that Japanese didn’t set out to exterminate Chinese people, maybe true maybe not. However, given the sheer number of Chinese people, that’s an impossible goal. What they did was dramatically lowering Chinese population by systematic killing with most cruel methods. If that was not systematic genocide attempt, I wonder what is.

In modern time, when print press is available, photos record history events, civilization is advocated. This was the only time, a whole nation celebrated 2 vicious killers in public, in top stories of newspapers, after those 2 killers had completed a beheading competition of random civilians in the country they invaded. For your reference, the “winner” accomplished 106 counts, and that shameful country is the peace-loving Imperial Japan.

Again, you are entitled to hold your own opinion, whether it’s comparable to Holocaust, or whether Chinese lives worth less. As another poster mentioned that US as a great country full of freedom, allows KKK and Neo-Nazis to exercise their freedom of speech, but you are claiming a mere comparison of Nanking and Holocaust is offensive. How much more offensive do you want to be?

Please make no mistake that I do not want to persuade you to change your opinion. All I am doing here is to set the record straight – the comparison of Nanking and Holocaust did NOT offend Jewish people in the past, and it does NOT offend them in this thread either. However, it did offend someone, and it will continue to do so. It offended those ones have tried everything possible to downplay Japanese atrocities. It also offended you.

 

Now you are just clutching for random straws. That "new concept" you are talking about is called "saying", and I'm well aware of it. You first implied that the Chinese wanted to commit genocide to the Japanese, then when I objected, you said that you were only saying it in the same manner as a policeman asking a criminal about his plans. I don't think this qualifies as a "saying".

Nice try, your question was not asking why someone make a mistake, you are asking whether that person is going to make a mistake. It's like asking "Are the Germans gonna exterminate the Jews again?", or "Is America going to bomb the Iraqi civilians again?", or "Is this white guy gonna put on his klan's hood and hang some African Americans?", or "Is this priest gonna rape some little kiddies?", or "is Ottoman going to cheat on this partner?". Do you get the gist of it? Your questions are the perfect form of smearing.

I don't know what your standard of "commonly people" is, but as far as I'm concerned, I wouldn't ask or make a comment to anyone that I've met on a basketball forum whether his/her country is going to commit genocide to another nation. Is genocide such a "commonly" discussed topic in America?

Again, you surprise me with your dark and simplistic views. I'd have thought that a more common sense question would be "It would seem that a logical end result would be to for the Muslims and Jews to realize that conflict are bad for both sides, and peaceful negotiations would be much better".

Maybe I've misunderstood the thinkings of the "commonly" Americans ... I thought they were mostly peace loving and would do everything possible to stop going to wars and conflicts.

The more you say, the more you make me think that in your mind, there can be only either peace or genocide. To someone like me, the idea of a genocide is the worst thing ever and it's almost unspeakable, and I would certainly not toss it around as freely as you do. I've got to say that you seem to have given the idea of genocide quite a lot of thought, otherwise why would you be bringing it up when it comes to every single conflict?

Gee, if everyone did what they thought was best for themselves without consideration for the others, the world would have been a total ****hole, and there might not be enough humans left to start a conflict. The Japanese invaded China and Korea thinking that was what was best for themselves, and you've already seen how much destruction it brought to China, Korea and Japan. If the Japanese still refuse to be considerate to the others, then there is still danger for it to go back to its fascist past.

What? Not starting a war to invade China is only good for the Chinese? Let me remind you again: China was invaded by the Mongolians and the Japanese. China never enslaved either Mongolia or Japan. I (and most Chinese) have
the philosophy that a man should not do things to others if he doesn't want others to do the same thing to him. The Chinese don't want war, and they believe wars are bad for everyone, that's why the Chinese don't want Japan and Mongolia to start any wars. Is this so hard to understand? Do you think it's bad thing to want peace?

The Mongolians are no longer a threat to the peace of its region because they no longer have the political will to do so, that's the main point. And the lack of political will partly comes from the lack of military might. The lack of military might helps to ease the fear of the Chinese, who were massacred in the millions by the Mongolians when the last time the Mongolians were powerful.

China doesn't care about being the alpha dog, in fact, we don't even think about being a leader, we just want to be sure that no one is going to invade our country and massacre us in the millions again. Is this concept to hard for you to understand?

The Sun's hot, water's wet, are these facts relevant? I didn't complain about your details, or even the details about the Japanese official's apologies. For the Japanese, I only care about whether they feel real remorse, and I have a problem with them because they don't seem to feel real remorse.

Not to be pedantic, Panda didn't exactly say the "current Japanese Emperor" in his original post, did he? The WW2 emperor died in 1989, and he had had plenty of time to offer a proper apology before his death, but he didn't. So, you think his son doesn't have the responsibility to say the things that his father should have said but never did?

What? Are you an internet mind reader now? How the hell could you claim to know what I think after only seeing a few posts of mine? You don't have to tell me not to fear Japan's threat, Japan's politicians, policies, defense budgets and their attitude towards China together send a very clear and powerful message to whether the fear is justified. If the Japanese PM makes a public promise to never visit Yakusuni Shrine, it would be a great start, then I'd like to them to have the same kind of history education about Japans role in WW2 as the German history education. These 2 things would go a very long way to ease the fear of the Chinese.

 

Nothing to generally respond to in your post. I stand by everything said in the previous post and in my view your responses were not particularly logically compelling enough in response to my points to require responses. I'm going to respond to just a couple of minor things that caused me to LOL.

There is nothing wrong if asking if I am going to cheat on my partner. That strikes me as a reasonable question if we are in a discussion on the general subject of women, or sex, or whatever. All that has to happen is for me to say, "No." and we establish that I am not interested in cheating. There is no way that that response can be misconstrued or use 'as a smear' as you say.

But if you ask me and I say, "No, I'm not going to have sex. But if my secretary asked to give me a blow job I wouldn't say no", then that is hardly smearing and it is hardly the questioner's fault that the guilty man has incriminated himself.

If you expect Hirohito, the only emperor that I know of that had attrocities commited in his name, to issue an apology I'm afraid you are going to be waiting a long time because as you have pointed out he is worm food. It is reasonable to make the assumption that Panda was not calling for research into zombification so Hirohito could issue his apology. If my assumption is too much for you I apologize.

Making a minor point to distinguishing the directness of blame strikes me as a reasonable minor issue in this discussion. Ensuring that the writer wasn't talking about raising the dead, is not necessarily something that seems necessary or worth considering.

 

Ottomaton, your signature reminds me of Trader_Jorge's, abandoning all the context and taking a few words out of Batman's long post, to claim victory on an Internet message board.

Just my observation. Please carry on with your LOL.