| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"maff" |
| Date: |
27 Feb 2005 07:36:02 AM |
| Object: |
SoftPower, Hard Choices |
SoftPower, Hard Choices
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7037845/site/newsweek/
China is emerging as a major economic power, but will that translate
into a military threat? Taiwan will be the test.
By Melinda Liu and John Barry
Newsweek
March 7 issue - Ask a party bureaucrat in Beijing about China's foreign
ambitions these days, and the reply may sound like a beauty
contestant's doe-eyed promise to work for world harmony. "Peaceful
resolution of global problems is both our aim and our style," asserts
one official involved in international affairs. China has no interest
in becoming a military superpower, he insists. "A power, yes, but not a
superpower," he says. "We don't want to be enemies with anyone."
Taiwan
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.atheism/msg/84c9e453e27664d6
China
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.atheism/msg/d3294ecc38a6a57d
Is the wakening giant a monster?
http://tinyurl.com/iws6
A Blueprint for the Future
http://snipurl.com/a684
.
|
|
| User: "Jim Walsh" |
|
| Title: Re: Tibet for Tibetans |
01 Mar 2005 03:13:01 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 00:35:35 -0800, Yu thought carefully and wrote:
...BTW, the majority of Tibetans support being part of China.
I love this claim. And Mr. Yu proves this by the votes in dozens of free
and fair elections, eh? LOL. No. He proves this by asking the CCP if it is
loved in Tibet.
Here is my favorite CCP syllogism.
1. The people of China (Tibet) overwhelmingly support the CCP government
of China (Tibet).
2. The people of China (Tibet) are too BLAHBLAH2 to be allowed to vote in
free and a fair elections. Were they allowed to vote now, before they got
more BLAHBLAH2 they would be easily tricked into choosing bad guys.
3. Therefore the CCP are bad guys. [Hey, it follows from 1 and 2, eh?]
["BLAHBLAH1" stands for "uneducated" or some such thing that (supposedly)
"justifies" not allowing them to vote. BLAHBLAH2 stands for "education" or
whatever they supposedly need to be ready to vote.]
--
Love, Jim
.
|
|
|
| User: "Yu" |
|
| Title: Re: Tibet for Tibetans |
07 Mar 2005 07:42:38 PM |
|
|
Jim Walsh wrote:
On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 00:35:35 -0800, Yu thought carefully and wrote:
...BTW, the majority of Tibetans support being part of China.
I love this claim. And Mr. Yu proves this by the votes in dozens of
free
and fair elections, eh? LOL. No. He proves this by asking the CCP if
it is
loved in Tibet.
The CIA backed, aristocrat led, Tibet separatist guerillas in was
defeated. In the end, it was CIA's own admission that the lack of local
support led to their defeat.
While CIA lack local support in Tibet, they have a better record at
lying and brainwashing the Americans and we see their product like Jim
Walsh.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Komin" |
|
| Title: Re: Tibet for Tibetans |
07 Mar 2005 08:05:09 PM |
|
|
Former regime Tibetan Aristocrats monk leaders were all Nazi in their
original old Tibetan idealogy .
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Moore" |
|
| Title: Re: Tibet for Tibetans |
08 Mar 2005 11:13:32 AM |
|
|
In article <1110246158.420481.324270@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
Yu <yugaung@yahoo.com> wrote:
Jim Walsh wrote:
On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 00:35:35 -0800, Yu thought carefully and wrote:
...BTW, the majority of Tibetans support being part of China.
I love this claim. And Mr. Yu proves this by the votes in dozens of
free
and fair elections, eh? LOL. No. He proves this by asking the CCP if
it is
loved in Tibet.
The CIA backed, aristocrat led, Tibet separatist guerillas in was
defeated. In the end, it was CIA's own admission that the lack of local
support led to their defeat.
While CIA lack local support in Tibet, they have a better record at
lying and brainwashing the Americans and we see their product like Jim
Walsh.
Who's this "we"? You're all by yourself out in loonyland. It's laughable
to see Yu accuse others of being brainwashed.
Talking with Yu about the CIA is like talking to a suicide bomber about
American imperialism. American imperialism is real but the suicide bomber
is too whacked out to have a proper conversation with about it. Ditto
for Comrade Yu.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jez" |
|
| Title: Re: Neville Maxwell |
04 Mar 2005 10:05:38 AM |
|
|
maff wrote:
Jim Walsh wrote:
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 01:17:01 -0800, maff thought carefully and wrote:
Jim Walsh wrote:
So, the PLA soldiers were just out for a walk, got lost and
happened to
end up in Tibet, where they quickly killed everyone who resisted?
There was no resistance.
Why send the army if there was no resistance? And, btw, what Chinese
officials were administering Tibet prior to the arrival of the army?
It was not just Tibet. There was hardly any government in most of China
under Zen fascists or KMT fascists. Even KMT considered Tibet part of
China.
http://www.index-china.com/index-english/Tibet-s.html
http://www.michaelparenti.org/Tibet.html
--
Jez
'Realism is seductive because once you have accepted the reasonable
notion that you should base your actions on reality, you are too often
led to accept, without much questioning, someone else's version of what
that reality is. It is a crucial act of independent thinking to be
skeptical of someone else's description of reality.'-
Howard Zinn
NFS Underground2, Americas Army And MOH-PA
.
|
|
|
| User: "maff" |
|
| Title: Alan Winnington |
05 Mar 2005 03:11:30 AM |
|
|
Jez wrote:
maff wrote:
Jim Walsh wrote:
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 01:17:01 -0800, maff thought carefully and
wrote:
Jim Walsh wrote:
So, the PLA soldiers were just out for a walk, got lost and
happened to
end up in Tibet, where they quickly killed everyone who resisted?
There was no resistance.
Why send the army if there was no resistance? And, btw, what
Chinese
officials were administering Tibet prior to the arrival of the
army?
It was not just Tibet. There was hardly any government in most of
China
under Zen fascists or KMT fascists. Even KMT considered Tibet part
of
China.
http://www.index-china.com/index-english/Tibet-s.html
http://www.michaelparenti.org/Tibet.html
Absolutely.
The slaves of the Cool Mountains: The ancient social conditions and
changes now in progress on the remote south-western borders of China
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/B0000CKEKF/
Alan Winnington
http://www.google.com/search?tab=nw&q=%22Alan+Winnington%22&num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&sa=N
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Alan+Winnington%22&btnG=Google+Search&hl=en&cat=gwd%2FTop
http://groups-beta.google.com/groups?q=%22Alan+Winnington%22&start=0&scoring=d&num=100&hl=en&lr=&safe=off&
http://news.google.com/news?tab=gn&q=%22Alan%20Winnington%22&num=100&hl=en&lr=&safe=off&
Anna Louise Strong
http://www.google.com/search?tab=nw&q=%22Anna+Louise+Strong%22&num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&sa=N
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Anna+Louise+Strong%22&btnG=Google+Search&hl=en&cat=gwd%2FTop
http://groups-beta.google.com/groups?q=%22Anna+Louise+Strong%22&start=0&scoring=d&num=100&hl=en&lr=&safe=off&
http://news.google.com/news?tab=gn&q=%22Anna%20Louise%20Strong%22&num=100&hl=en&lr=&safe=off&
--
Jez
'Realism is seductive because once you have accepted the reasonable
notion that you should base your actions on reality, you are too
often
led to accept, without much questioning, someone else's version of
what
that reality is. It is a crucial act of independent thinking to be
skeptical of someone else's description of reality.'-
Howard Zinn
NFS Underground2, Americas Army And MOH-PA
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jim Walsh" |
|
| Title: Re: Neville Maxwell |
28 Feb 2005 03:25:06 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 01:17:01 -0800, maff thought carefully and wrote:
Why would it be wrong? Even Dalai Lama accepted Tibet was part of China.
Let's hold a free and fair election in Tibet to determine if being part of
China is what the people want.
--
Love, Jim
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
.
|
|
|
| User: "maff" |
|
| Title: Re: Neville Maxwell |
28 Feb 2005 03:42:17 AM |
|
|
Jim Walsh wrote:
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 01:17:01 -0800, maff thought carefully and wrote:
Why would it be wrong? Even Dalai Lama accepted Tibet was part of
China.
Let's hold a free and fair election in Tibet to determine if being
part of
China is what the people want.
So why not are you demanding free and fair elections to determine that
the Blue states remain part of the Union?
--
Love, Jim
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption
=----
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim Walsh" |
|
| Title: World Government |
01 Mar 2005 01:50:38 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 01:42:17 -0800, maff thought carefully and wrote:
Jim Walsh wrote:
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 01:17:01 -0800, maff thought carefully and wrote:
Why would it be wrong? Even Dalai Lama accepted Tibet was part of
China.
Let's hold a free and fair election in Tibet to determine if being
part of
China is what the people want.
So why not are you demanding free and fair elections to determine that
the Blue states remain part of the Union?
I support the right of people to do so. I personally don't want to see
America cut into pieces. I would prefer America to become a part of a
world government. I would prefer for all nations to become a part of a
world government.
Nations are a source wars. I would prefer for them all to dissolve.
--
Love, Jim
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
.
|
|
|
| User: "maff" |
|
| Title: Re: World Government |
01 Mar 2005 05:11:30 AM |
|
|
Jim Walsh wrote:
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 01:42:17 -0800, maff thought carefully and wrote:
Jim Walsh wrote:
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 01:17:01 -0800, maff thought carefully and
wrote:
Why would it be wrong? Even Dalai Lama accepted Tibet was part
of
China.
Let's hold a free and fair election in Tibet to determine if being
part of
China is what the people want.
So why not are you demanding free and fair elections to determine
that
the Blue states remain part of the Union?
I support the right of people to do so. I personally don't want to
see
America cut into pieces. I would prefer America to become a part of a
world government. I would prefer for all nations to become a part of
a
world government.
Nations are a source wars. I would prefer for them all to dissolve.
It can only be only after fascists arer defeated and dismantled.
--
Love, Jim
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption
=----
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Painter" |
|
| Title: Re: World Government |
03 Mar 2005 06:06:01 PM |
|
|
maff wrote:
Jim Walsh wrote:
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 01:42:17 -0800, maff thought carefully and wrote:
Jim Walsh wrote:
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 01:17:01 -0800, maff thought carefully and
wrote:
Why would it be wrong? Even Dalai Lama accepted Tibet was part
of
China.
Let's hold a free and fair election in Tibet to determine if being
part of China is what the people want.
So why not are you demanding free and fair elections to determine
that the Blue states remain part of the Union?
I support the right of people to do so. I personally don't want to
see America cut into pieces. I would prefer America to become a part
of a world government. I would prefer for all nations to become a
part of a world government.
Nations are a source wars. I would prefer for them all to dissolve.
I'd rather see them viewed the way we tend to view states in the USA. Every
body knows their state is the best one but rarely fight over it.
I just wish they'd stay home.
It can only be only after fascists arer defeated and dismantled.
I disagree. Keep a small fascist state, a communist one, maybe one based on
pure capitalism, etc.
People would re-invent the idea anyway and they could be allowed to move to
the state they believed in, and back with no penalty.
Pure communism has tended to last long period of time under such
conditions.
.
|
|
|
| User: "maff" |
|
| Title: Re: World Government |
04 Mar 2005 04:01:55 AM |
|
|
Mike Painter wrote:
maff wrote:
Jim Walsh wrote:
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 01:42:17 -0800, maff thought carefully and
wrote:
Jim Walsh wrote:
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 01:17:01 -0800, maff thought carefully and
wrote:
Why would it be wrong? Even Dalai Lama accepted Tibet was part
of
China.
Let's hold a free and fair election in Tibet to determine if
being
part of China is what the people want.
So why not are you demanding free and fair elections to determine
that the Blue states remain part of the Union?
I support the right of people to do so. I personally don't want to
see America cut into pieces. I would prefer America to become a
part
of a world government. I would prefer for all nations to become a
part of a world government.
Nations are a source wars. I would prefer for them all to
dissolve.
I'd rather see them viewed the way we tend to view states in the USA.
Every
body knows their state is the best one but rarely fight over it.
I just wish they'd stay home.
It can only be only after fascists arer defeated and dismantled.
I disagree. Keep a small fascist state, a communist one, maybe one
based on
pure capitalism, etc.
People would re-invent the idea anyway and they could be allowed to
move to
the state they believed in, and back with no penalty.
Pure communism has tended to last long period of time under such
conditions.
"The wicked leader is he who the people
despise. The good leader is he who the people
revere. The great leader is he who the people
say, 'we did it ourselves'."
"If you want to be a great leader,
you must learn to follow the Tao.
Stop trying to control.
Let go of fixed plans and concepts,
and the world will govern itself.
"The more prohibitions you have,
the less virtuous people will be.
The more weapons you have,
the less secure people will be.
The more subsidies you have,
the less self-reliant people will be.
"Therefore the Master says:
I let go of the law,
and people become honest.
I let go of economics,
and people become prosperous.
I let go of religion,
and people become serene.
I let go of all desire for the common good,
and the good becomes common as grass."
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "maff" |
|
| Title: Re: World Government |
04 Mar 2005 04:00:11 AM |
|
|
Mike Painter wrote:
maff wrote:
Jim Walsh wrote:
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 01:42:17 -0800, maff thought carefully and
wrote:
Jim Walsh wrote:
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 01:17:01 -0800, maff thought carefully and
wrote:
Why would it be wrong? Even Dalai Lama accepted Tibet was part
of
China.
Let's hold a free and fair election in Tibet to determine if
being
part of China is what the people want.
So why not are you demanding free and fair elections to determine
that the Blue states remain part of the Union?
I support the right of people to do so. I personally don't want to
see America cut into pieces. I would prefer America to become a
part
of a world government. I would prefer for all nations to become a
part of a world government.
Nations are a source wars. I would prefer for them all to
dissolve.
I'd rather see them viewed the way we tend to view states in the USA.
Every
body knows their state is the best one but rarely fight over it.
I just wish they'd stay home.
It can only be only after fascists arer defeated and dismantled.
I disagree. Keep a small fascist state, a communist one, maybe one
based on
pure capitalism, etc.
People would re-invent the idea anyway and they could be allowed to
move to
the state they believed in, and back with no penalty.
Pure communism has tended to last long period of time under such
conditions.
Who said anything about Communism?
Lao T'zu
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.atheism/msg/81a274e49c66ae5f
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jim Walsh" |
|
| Title: Re: World Government |
04 Mar 2005 01:56:18 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 00:06:01 +0000, Mike Painter thought carefully and
wrote:
Jim Walsh wrote:
Nations are a source of wars. I would prefer for them all to dissolve.
I'd rather see them viewed the way we tend to view states in the USA.
Every body knows their state is the best one but rarely fight over it.
I just wish they'd stay home.
Well said.
--
Love, Jim
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "maff" |
|
| Title: Re: Neville Maxwell |
28 Feb 2005 05:35:20 AM |
|
|
Jim Walsh wrote:
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 01:03:45 -0800, maff thought carefully and wrote:
Jim Walsh wrote:
It it had been the policy then, the invasion of Tibet could have
been
There was no invasion of Tibet.
So, the PLA soldiers were just out for a walk, got lost and happened
to
end up in Tibet, where they quickly killed everyone who resisted?
You need to show more evidence than assertions of a Zen fascist.
The invasion of Tibet is a fact. [Similarly the invasion of Iraq is a
fact.]
Tibet was not a sovereign country while Iraq was.
The issue is not whether or not it happened, the issue is whether or
not
it was wrong.
Why would it be wrong? It was part of China.
If Tibet was independent, why was there a Tibetan delegation to go to
Nanjing to take part in drafting of a new Chinese constitution in 1947?
KMT still ruled China until 1949.
In 1950 a Chinese army entered Tibet with little resistance, since
there was no professional Tibetan army. In May 1951 a treaty secretly
signed by representatives of the Dalai Lama and local government,
provided for Chinese military occupation and rule by a joint
Chinese-Tibetan authority. The Chinese at this time did not try to
reform Tibet's social or religious system.
http://www.answers.com/topic/history-of-tibet
--
Love, Jim
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim Walsh" |
|
| Title: The Invasion of Tibetan |
01 Mar 2005 01:47:02 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 03:35:20 -0800, maff thought carefully and wrote:
Jim Walsh wrote:
There was no invasion of Tibet.
So, the PLA soldiers were just out for a walk, got lost and happened to
end up in Tibet, where they quickly killed everyone who resisted?
You need to show more evidence than assertions of a Zen fascist.
The CCP announced that the PLA went to Tibet. I only relying on the CCP.
Here is a question for you: The PLA went to Tibet, true or false? [BTW, I
know you lack the integrity to answer.]
The invasion of Tibet is a fact. [Similarly the invasion of Iraq is a
fact.]
Tibet was not a sovereign country while Iraq was.
LOL. Admitting that Tibet was invaded, eh?
The issue is not whether or not it happened, the issue is whether or
not it was wrong.
Why would it be wrong? It was part of China.
Not according to its residents.
In 1950 a Chinese army entered Tibet with little resistance, since there
was no professional Tibetan army.
Ah, NOW you admit that there was an invasion, and even that there was
resistance.
In May 1951 a treaty secretly signed
by representatives of the Dalai Lama and local government, provided for
Chinese military occupation and rule by a joint Chinese-Tibetan
authority. The Chinese at this time did not try to reform Tibet's social
or religious system.
And a treaty signed at gun point means????
I seem to recall that China gave Taiwan to Japan in a treaty. Did you
forget that? Do you consider that treaty binding on the PRC?
BTW, treaties are signed between countries. So, the use of the word
"treaty" means Tibet and China were both countries.
--
Love, Jim
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
.
|
|
|
| User: "maff" |
|
| Title: Re: The Invasion of Tibetan |
01 Mar 2005 05:41:51 AM |
|
|
Jim Walsh wrote:
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 03:35:20 -0800, maff thought carefully and wrote:
Jim Walsh wrote:
There was no invasion of Tibet.
So, the PLA soldiers were just out for a walk, got lost and
happened to
end up in Tibet, where they quickly killed everyone who resisted?
You need to show more evidence than assertions of a Zen fascist.
The CCP announced that the PLA went to Tibet. I only relying on the
CCP.
Here is a question for you: The PLA went to Tibet, true or false?
[BTW, I
know you lack the integrity to answer.]
True. Why would be PLA be stationed outside China?
The invasion of Tibet is a fact. [Similarly the invasion of Iraq
is a
fact.]
Tibet was not a sovereign country while Iraq was.
LOL. Admitting that Tibet was invaded, eh?
So why don't you show the evidence that Tibet was an independent
country?
The issue is not whether or not it happened, the issue is whether
or
not it was wrong.
Why would it be wrong? It was part of China.
Not according to its residents.
Zen fascist apologetics won't work. You can always try the
International Court.
In 1950 a Chinese army entered Tibet with little resistance, since
there
was no professional Tibetan army.
Ah, NOW you admit that there was an invasion, and even that there was
resistance.
It said little resistance. Are you dense, Zen fascist? Even Dalai Lama
was part of the Chinese government until CIA decided otherwise.
In May 1951 a treaty secretly signed
by representatives of the Dalai Lama and local government, provided
for
Chinese military occupation and rule by a joint Chinese-Tibetan
authority. The Chinese at this time did not try to reform Tibet's
social
or religious system.
And a treaty signed at gun point means????
What gun point? Due to logistics, Chinese officials flew to Lhasa from
New Delhi. KNT officials had fled.
If Tibet was an independent country, why did the Tibetan delegation
(like all other provinces or autonomous regions) take part in the
formulation of a new Chinese constitution in 1947? Chiang Kai-shek
still ruled China until 1949.
I seem to recall that China gave Taiwan to Japan in a treaty. Did you
forget that? Do you consider that treaty binding on the PRC?
What has it got do with Tibet? Did you forget that Japanese Zen and
Shinto fascists were defeated in World War II?
BTW, treaties are signed between countries. So, the use of the word
"treaty" means Tibet and China were both countries.
So why aren't you telling that to the International Court? You'll be
laughed off the court.
--
Love, Jim
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption
=----
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim Walsh" |
|
| Title: Re: The Invasion of Tibetan |
01 Mar 2005 07:48:09 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 03:41:51 -0800, maff thought carefully and wrote:
Jim Walsh wrote:
LOL. Admitting that Tibet was invaded, eh?
So why don't you show the evidence that Tibet was an independent
country?
The fact (admitted by you) that it was invaded means that previous to the
invasion it was independent.
You are probably one of those who says that Taiwan is not independent of
the PRC. Funny use of "independent", eh?
--
Love, Jim
.
|
|
|
| User: "maff" |
|
| Title: Re: The Invasion of Tibetan |
01 Mar 2005 07:54:33 AM |
|
|
Jim Walsh wrote:
On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 03:41:51 -0800, maff thought carefully and wrote:
Jim Walsh wrote:
LOL. Admitting that Tibet was invaded, eh?
So why don't you show the evidence that Tibet was an independent
country?
The fact (admitted by you) that it was invaded means that previous to
the
invasion it was independent.
There was no such admission, Zen fascist scum. Do you think that the
courts are stupid?
You are probably one of those who says that Taiwan is not independent
of
the PRC. Funny use of "independent", eh?
But both admit there's only one China.
--
Love, Jim
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim Walsh" |
|
| Title: Re: The Invasion of Tibetan |
01 Mar 2005 08:05:22 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 05:54:33 -0800, maff thought carefully and wrote:
Jim Walsh wrote:
You are probably one of those who says that Taiwan is not independent
of the PRC. Funny use of "independent", eh?
But both admit there's only one China.
Haven't been keeping up with current events, eh?
--
Love, Jim
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
.
|
|
|
| User: "maff" |
|
| Title: Chen Shui-bian |
01 Mar 2005 02:32:10 PM |
|
|
Jim Walsh wrote:
On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 05:54:33 -0800, maff thought carefully and wrote:
Jim Walsh wrote:
You are probably one of those who says that Taiwan is not
independent
of the PRC. Funny use of "independent", eh?
But both admit there's only one China.
Haven't been keeping up with current events, eh?
That would be you. Even Chen Shui-bian admitted that there's no
consensus for an independent Taiwan.
Chen Shui-bian
http://news.google.com/news?num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=+%22Chen+Shui-bian%22&sa=N&tab=gn
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=+%22Chen+Shui-bian%22&sa=N&tab=nw
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=+%22Chen+Shui-bian%22&sa=N&tab=wd&cat=gwd%2FTop
http://groups.google.com/groups?as_epq=Chen%20Shui%20bian&safe=images&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&as_scoring=d&lr=&num=100&hl=en
--
Love, Jim
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption
=----
.
|
|
|
| User: "Yang, AthD h.c, Kicking AWOLs Cocaine Snorting Ass" |
|
| Title: Re: Chen Shui-bian |
01 Mar 2005 09:33:11 PM |
|
|
On 1 Mar 2005 12:32:10 -0800, "maff" <maff91@yahoo.com> wrote:
Jim Walsh wrote:
On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 05:54:33 -0800, maff thought carefully and wrote:
Jim Walsh wrote:
You are probably one of those who says that Taiwan is not
independent
of the PRC. Funny use of "independent", eh?
But both admit there's only one China.
I'm from Taiwan, and I think the KMT's "one China" stance was silly.
The KMT believed in a) one China b) to be ruled by the KMT c) had
"senators" representing Hunan Province 40 years after they fled to
Taiwan.
Haven't been keeping up with current events, eh?
That would be you. Even Chen Shui-bian admitted that there's no
consensus for an independent Taiwan.
Chen Shui-bian
http://news.google.com/news?num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=+%22Chen+Shui-bian%22&sa=N&tab=gn
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=+%22Chen+Shui-bian%22&sa=N&tab=nw
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=+%22Chen+Shui-bian%22&sa=N&tab=wd&cat=gwd%2FTop
http://groups.google.com/groups?as_epq=Chen%20Shui%20bian&safe=images&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&as_scoring=d&lr=&num=100&hl=en
--
Love, Jim
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption
=----
-----
Yang
a.a. #28
AthD (h.c.) conferred by the regents of the LCL
a.a. pastor #-273.15, the most frigid church of Celcius nee Kelvin
EAC Econometric Forecast and Sorcery Division
Proudly plonked by Lani Girl and Crazyalec (aka aka Yang's little poltregeist *****)
The Bush 'balanced' budget: 1.6 trillion and worsening
The Bush 'economic' policy: 12 million FEWER jobs than Clinton and counting
The Bush Iraq lie: -1497 GIs, one friend's co-worker's son and mounting
Having Bush ***** up my country: Worthless
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jim Walsh" |
|
| Title: Re: Chen Shui-bian |
02 Mar 2005 01:55:23 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 12:32:10 -0800, maff thought carefully and wrote:
That would be you. Even Chen Shui-bian admitted that there's no
consensus for an independent Taiwan.
Taiwan is independent NOW. If it weren't independent, the CCP would have
nothing to squeal about.
There is no substantial consensus to "formally declare" independence. But
Taiwan is in fact independent.
--
Love, Jim
.
|
|
|
| User: "maff" |
|
| Title: Re: Chen Shui-bian |
02 Mar 2005 02:53:21 AM |
|
|
Jim Walsh wrote:
On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 12:32:10 -0800, maff thought carefully and wrote:
That would be you. Even Chen Shui-bian admitted that there's no
consensus for an independent Taiwan.
Taiwan is independent NOW. If it weren't independent, the CCP would
have
nothing to squeal about.
If it's independent then why would Chen Shui-bian say there's no
consensus for an independent Taiwan?
There is no substantial consensus to "formally declare" independence.
But
Taiwan is in fact independent.
Just because Zen fascists says so won't make it so.
--
Love, Jim
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "ltlee1" |
|
| Title: Re: Chen Shui-bian |
01 Mar 2005 02:57:04 PM |
|
|
maff wrote:
Jim Walsh wrote:
On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 05:54:33 -0800, maff thought carefully and
wrote:
Jim Walsh wrote:
You are probably one of those who says that Taiwan is not
independent
of the PRC. Funny use of "independent", eh?
But both admit there's only one China.
Haven't been keeping up with current events, eh?
Signature Jim Walsh Ignorance.
That would be you. Even Chen Shui-bian admitted that there's no
consensus for an independent Taiwan.
Chen's statement is stronger than that, he admitted that there will be
no Taiwan Independence during his term, can't be done.
http://news.chinatimes.com/Chinatimes/Moment/newfocus-index/0,3687,940302001+94030201+0+002835,00.html
Chen Shui-bian
http://news.google.com/news?num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=+%22Chen+Shui-bian%22&sa=N&tab=gn
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=+%22Chen+Shui-bian%22&sa=N&tab=nw
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=+%22Chen+Shui-bian%22&sa=N&tab=wd&cat=gwd%2FTop
http://groups.google.com/groups?as_epq=Chen%20Shui%20bian&safe=images&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&as_scoring=d&lr=&num=100&hl=en
--
Love, Jim
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure
Usenet
News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via
Encryption
=----
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim Walsh" |
|
| Title: Re: Chen Shui-bian |
02 Mar 2005 01:56:25 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 12:57:04 -0800, ltlee1 thought carefully and wrote:
Chen's statement is stronger than that, he admitted that there will be
no Taiwan Independence during his term, can't be done.
No formal declaration.
But Taiwan is already, in fact, independent.
If it weren't, the CCP would not be squealing like a rat.
--
Love, Jim
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
