In 1980, in South Korea (just nine years before Tiananmen Square) tens of thousands of students took to the streets to protest for democracy. As a result about two thousand South Korean students were massacred by the military whilst trying to overthrow the ruling dictatorship!! the South Korean military at that time was controlled by the US govt, the US govt also supported the ruling dictatorship in South Korea. So the US govt not only did not gave support to the Korean students in their struggle for democracy but also gave approval for the South Korean military to brutally quell the student protests!! So the question is, is the west (especially the US) more concerned about self interests than human rights and democracy?? Don't forget, the Kwangju massacre has been largely forgotten in the west, unlike Tiananmen which still has massive explosure in the western media. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4557315.stm Lingering legacy of Korean massacre By Becky Branford BBC News A quarter of a century on, Koreans are remembering one of the ugliest episodes in their history. In May 1980, hundreds of civilians were massacred by soldiers in the south-western city of Kwangju after rising up against military rule. Although it was brutally put down, the Kwangju Uprising is now seen by many as a pivotal moment in the South Korean struggle for democracy in the long period of dictatorship following the Korean war. And some contend the uprising had important ramifications which are still being felt now, both inside Korea and beyond its borders. There is a sombre monument and museum dedicated to the massacre in Kwangju, and the anniversary of the beginning of the siege on 18 May is now a public holiday in Korea. Batons and bayonets The protests in Kwangju in the spring of 1980 were not unusual. The country was being swept by a tide of demonstrations, mainly by students, in the wake of the assassination of the dictator Park Chung Hee and the military coup which brought General Chun Doo-hwan to power in his place. It was the sheer, open brutality of the response of Korean paratroops which proved decisive. The paratroops charged crowds with batons and bayonets, stripped students and other citizens down to their underwear in the streets before beating them, and fired indiscriminately into crowds. This brutality drew outraged ordinary citizens into the struggle, creating a mass movement of resistance which forced the military to retreat from the city for five days, leaving the city in full control of the residents. The military retook the city on 27 May, crushing the citizens' resistance in an overwhelming show of force. The final toll of those who lost their lives is still unknown, as it is believed the military dumped bodies in mass graves or lakes. Estimates today range from 500 to 2,000. 'No-one left' Hwang Sok-yong is one of Korea's best-known novelists, and was a leading young dissident who lived in Kwangju at the time of the uprising. He was away at the time the siege began, and then went into hiding while authorities rounded up thousands of people they suspected of dissident activities. "Six months later, I went back to my home in Kwangju," Mr Hwang told the BBC News website, "and nobody was there. Everybody was in prison, or had died, or had run away. "My young friends, many of them died." Many of those who escaped or survived say they still bear physical and psychological scars from the massacre, or feel guilty they lived when friends and family died. Around the country, military reprisals against perceived agitators followed in the immediate aftermath of the massacre. Dawn of democracy But commentators are agreed that in the longer term the Kwangju massacre played a hugely important role in forcing Korean authorities finally to begin adopting democratic reforms in 1987. "What started in 1980 ended in 1987," says Mr Hwang. "The Kwangju Uprising lit the fuse of the dynamite stick of democracy." The uprising, he explains, mobilised ordinary citizens to join a struggle which until then had been mostly confined to students and dissidents. "It was the birth of citizenship. It was the beginning of a western-style civil society - and Korean modernity," he said. All three Korean presidents selected in the country's fully democratic elections have been aligned with the pro-democracy movements of which Kwangju became emblematic. The election of Kim Dae-jung in 1998 seemed particularly symbolic. From a town in the same Cholla province as Kwangju, Mr Kim was arrested on charges of sedition in May 1980 - an additional spur to those who participated in the uprising. American antipathy The experience in Kwangju also firmly yoked Koreans' struggle for liberation from dictatorship with a conviction they must also distance themselves from US control, commentators say. Since the Korean war, tens of thousands of US troops have been stationed in the South and at the time of the Kwangju uprising, a US general retained ultimate operational control over combined US and South Korean forces. "The US had been supporting Park Chung Hee since [he took power] in 1961, and it did nothing as Chun Doo-hwan seized power," Bruce Cumings, professor of history at the University of Chicago and a prominent Korea expert, told the BBC News website. "It was as plain as the nose on anyone's face that the US was supporting Park Chung Hee and then his protege, and it was much more worried about stability and North Korea than it was about democracy in the South. "Kwangju just poisoned relations with the US." He says that while authorities in South Korea have gone to extensive lengths to document what happened in Kwangju, Washington has never conducted "a serious investigation" into the US role in the massacre. Northern warming While Koreans were questioning the US role in Korean affairs, they were also challenging national hostility to North Korea, says Mr Hwang. "It started people thinking about 'us and them'. Who are we? Who are they? The Korean special troops were part of the US military, people started thinking, but North Korea is part of us. "Their attitude changed. It encouraged negotiation and co-operation with North Korea." This softer approach would eventually result in Kim Dae-jung's "sunshine policy" of engagement with the North. Twenty-five years on, some Koreans express fear that Korean schoolchildren are beginning to forget the sacrifice of those who died in Kwangju. But it seems clear the uprising's cultural and political legacy remains strong. Heres some more articles on this subject: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2002337286_na16art.html http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives /55a/182.html http://baltimorechronicle.com/jun03_barfield.html
FYI, be forewarned before providing this guy your "honest or unbiased" views. He's seems to be a fervent anti-west, anti-white racist who enjoys bashing opinions that don't conform to his own anti-American views. An example of his style of discussion: He's already had several of his more colorful replies to me using similar 'academic' language removed by admin. This seems to be nothing more than an opinion flame trap for him to continue to express his deep seated racist and anti-western views. If nothing else, one really has to wonder why is such a question being asked within a forum reserved for Chinese topics? Don't fall for it. ADMIN: This thread is about an incident that happened in Korea, please move this into the appropriate forum.
Revealing western(especially the US) hypocrite..... Let me reiterate why I think what happened at the Kwangju massacre is important to the discussion on the events of Tiananmen Square. At Kwangju in South Korea in 1980 (similar to Tiananmen) we have thousands of Korean students protesting for democracy and the end of the dictatorial rule!! the US govt chose NOT to support the students for democratic change, but instead THE US GOVT GAVE IT'S SUPPORT FOR THE RULING DICTATORSHIP!! The US govt and military also had control of the South Korean military at that time. The US govt could have prevented much of the bloodshed and the massacre of the Korean students, but instead the US GOVT GAVE IT'S APPROVAL FOR THE BRUTAL CRACKDOWN ON THE STUDENTS PROTESTS!! This shows despite the constant rhetoric about democracy and human rights regarding Tiananmen square, the US and the west actually regard self interests as absolutely paramount when it comes to foreign policy, which makes their criticisms and demands for democracy elsewhere in the world pretty hollow!!
If you really want to blame the US for assisting a brutal dictatorship in killing their over 100,000 of their own people, you should refer to my thread: http://www.dramasian.com/forum/showthread.php?t=35777 ...which was properly and already posted last year into the Korean forum, where this subject matter is On Topic. But instead, you've posted it here, in the China forum, where it is considered Off Topic; why did you choose to post it here? My suspicion is, to simply use US or their allies misbehavior, as a distraction rebuttal defense for Chinese crimes. As such, your putting it here would still be considered the failed logic of ignoratio elenchi; that is, you're proving something that wasn't asked and was not a part of the issue. Sure, we all know that the United States is an evil imperialist country that tortured prisoners and had killed millions. But why hasn't the PRC come clean with what it did in Tiananmen Square 20 years ago... ...was the appropriate question being asked in discussion threads on Chinese issues, and one that some here repeatedly failed to have the courage to confront. All the red herrings that you throw at it is just a clear sign of your unwillingness to even discuss the truth, much less face up to it. And then you're suggesting that just because I'm (or anyone else) living within the sphere of a western government then, that I shouldn't have the moral authority (which is what you're claiming the west doesn't have) to question when Chinese people are being abused or killed? That my criticisms and demands for Chinese democracy in China would seem hollow? I would say that you, being a Canadian, are being pretty damned presumptuous.
Nice thread. I can see your logic and how all this can relate to Tiananman Square. US has to "forget" it since SK is not an independent country. It is occupied by US today. Don't believe it? SK does not have command rights even today, let alone 30 years ago. The SK students were killed by SK troops, but maybe under the command from their US boss. I would say it's mostly about self-interest than anything else. I can't believe anybody would be as naively alturistic as to say the west is exclusively concerned about human rights and democracy Just like any other nation in the world, what governments foreign policy is self-interest. Always.
One day everyone will realise that the governments of the world work together for a common cause, the propaganda on the news is just that.
Self-interest most definite. I don't think it has anything to do with "communism" or "democracy" but simply because USA is hostile to China. The US supported a dictatorship government over a bunch of students who simply wanted freedom and democracy reveals US and western hypocrisy. If it wasn't for this thread I would have never heard of such massacre took place in Korea. Both Kwangju and Tianamen took place within the same decade; except with deliberate blown-up media coverage and sabotage, one got placed in the spotlight while one got swept under the carpet and forgotten. I am very sick whenever I read this phony political religion called "freedom and democracy",USA, I don't think really believe inthis religion, they just use it as a rhetoric. When Soviet Union disbanded due to an over-eager reformer, Gorbachev, who now has very bad reputation among Russians, USA cheered and clapped, and they sugar coated it with this very same fake parlance "freedom and demoracy has arrived" meanwhile what it means in reality is the destruction of a major country and social upheavals. They promised Nato will not expand but now move to the doorstep of Russia and encircle it with bases and missile shields. Russia has to re-construct NATO counterbalance with CSTO, a dramatically watered down Warsaw Pact This episode I still remembered it watching it on video, America cheered and welcomed Russia and waht happened is a country getting dismantled and fractured, military alliance destroyed, a counter military block moving closer, companies being pillaged by foreigners in the name of free market reforms, scientists fleeing abroad due to no money and no work. Today Russia has stablized(after suffering serval currency collapses and debt defaults) but they are still getting pressed by ever moving uS military bases. So what does it all mean is that US stretched hand and its talk of welcoming Russia into a club of "freedom and demoacry" countries is fake and water matters is all about geopolitics and natonal interest. Now to look at this issue for China, For China itself, That's why I am ambivalent and not clear what exactly or why excatly should Chinese people and Chinese natoin derive certain lessons from it. I guess the lessons are as follows: Demestically, socio-economic welfare and government performance(perceptoin of competence and honesty) is important Internatonally, global strategic envrionment and counter intelligence is important. Tienanmen incident has both domestic and internatonal component But other than this, I am not sure why there are Chinese people demonstrating and demanding certain things, like issuing apology or they holding a "commemoration" with candles, why? Something that happened 20 years ago which was the mistake and the weakness of the whole Chinese nation which underwent a major change and caused social disclocations. Plus a foreign hand instigated and fanned it. I am not sure what excatly can be dervived by holding candle commemoration because my concern is that it can weaken and saw off the credibility of the government, and that opens the door for chaos, instability, internal arguments, and so on. There is no time for this and China especially cannot afford another round of chaos. There are too many upheavals and wars and outward emigration of people running from wars and poverty throughouthistory. There is no time for this. This episode should be buried(which indeed has been, in natural way, if Western media doesn't keep fanning it) and it's important to keep increasing socio-political and socio-econmic stability. If some people want to hold commemoration candle lighting, it's up to them but don't turn it into a self-suicide of the Chinese natoin and make socio-political chaos.
OK, so you also wouldn't mind the Japanese burying the Nanking issue? Should one always forget the past? Or are you considering self-reflection processes being possible after China is stable and wealthy enough or something like that? Nevertheless, of course countries primarily follow own interests. The US have supported a whole bunch of dictatorships in South America in the name of anti-communism, for example. And yes, there is hypocrisy in western countries. But it doesn't mean the concept of freedom is not worth considering. -mellow
Have you ever considered that perhaps China was led poorly? Imagine, if in the US (since everyone here seems to like to talk so much about the US whenever we try to talk about China) the Bush administration took away real voting rights and ensconced themselves into the presidency forever? So the US people are forced to keep the same idiot that got Americans into all sorts of crap around the world, collapsed the US economy, and worse, don't want to admit that it made any mistakes? Well, this is what has happened in China. Who suffers from this? Certainly not any Americans or westerners, no matter how "hypocritical" you think the west is. The bottom line is, Chinese people suffer at the hands of the CCP. They suffer from CCP corruption, CCP cover ups, CCP policies that prove disastrous, and by CCP insistence that the Chinese people serve ONLY the CCP. If you want another US comparison, it would be like saying that all Americans have been made to serve Bush and the republican party. It's a damned good thing that we in the US can vote out poor politicians. Why can't Chinese people have the same voice? Answer? The CCP won't allow it. This forum is about China. All the misdirection and citing of other problems or crimes by others, won't change the fact that Chinese people are suffering at the hands of their CCP masters.
People, I hope you all understand why I started this thread. The reason I started this thread about the Kwangju massacre in South Korea, is I wanted to create awareness and to show people how hypocritical the US and the west is. The US and the west is always criticising and wagging their finger at China and other nations about human rights and democracy, and yet in South Korea we have a situation that was nearly identical to Tiananmen square and the US does everything that CONTRADICT WHAT IT PREACHES!! So wheres the CONSISTENCY?? And what gives the US and the west the moral ground to lecture others??
Is that so? So why then are Chinese people in Hong Kong protesting? No matter how much you try to whitewash the blood bath, the PRC was the one that killed Chinese people. Talking about Korea massacres doesn't change that.
Such a tired topic. The US the leading democracy of the world have one of the worse track records of censorship. At least in Commie China they are absolutely transparent about it. But the the hypocrites would deny that censorship exist in the USA. Such attitudes are tiresome and immature. Check out this webpage. Censorship exist in all parts of the world including some of the very perfect "demockery" that single minded half wit would just refuse to admit it ever exist http://www.serendipity.li/cda.html <-- What we need are some hard truths Here is the extract about the great censoring machinery that exist in the USA. So where is the moral high grounds ? If a democracy can do that, why should China being a commie state be expected to do better ? haha. Enjoy the read. [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]Censorship in the United States[/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]This is a huge topic. Here we only touch upon it. Americans know little about censorship in America partly because of censorship in America and partly because they mostly don't care to know.[/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]Put briefly, the "official version" of reality in America is a product manufactured by the U.S. government and the U.S. mainstream media, and fed to a (to some extent) unsuspecting public which (mostly) consumes it uncritically (since most people "educated" in the U.S. have never been taught to think critically), thereby making things easier for the ruling elite (easier, that is, for them to pursue their plans for global domination and enslavement of all human beings on the Earth). The successful promulgation of the official version of reality requires the suppression (censorship) of alternative versions.[/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]For an example of a critical assessment of one part of current U.S. official reality, and the defense of an alternative view (never discussed seriously in any government-controlled newspaper or magazine, even those, such as The Nation, which purport to be critical of U.S. government policies), see The World Trade Center Demolition and the So-Called War on Terrorism.[/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]Censorship in America works partly by ignoring whatever is inconsistent with the official story. For example, Michael Meacher, who was environment minister in the U.K. government from May 1997 to June 2003, published in The Guardian (UK) an article entitled "This War on Terrorism is Bogus". You'd think this would be of interest to many Americans, bombarded daily with messages from the Bush Administration about how nobly it is acting to defend Americans from those evil "terrorists" and their "Terror". But almost all Americans never had a chance to read Meacher's article because they never heard about it — it was totally ignored by the mainstream media in the US and in Canada (except for a brief mention in the Toronto Star). Readers of this website can read it here:[/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]Michael Meacher: This War on Terrorism is Bogus[/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif] Joe Vialls Banned By Yahoo! BOOK BANNED IN AMERICA WHILE TROOPS DIE FOR FREEDOM US media covers up American war crimes in Iraq FBI shuts down 20 antiwar web sites: an unprecedented act of Internet censorship Media Cover-up — Leading Journalists Expose Major Cover-ups in Media Is Wikipedia Stifling 9/11 Truth? [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]As long as Wikipedia's 9/11 pages are censored by those wishing to suppress the truth about 9/11, and are skewed toward presenting one particular view, Wikipedia is not to be trusted.[/SIZE][/FONT][/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]Censorship at Voice of America[/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Voice of America, a federally supported international broadcasting organization, decided not to air a story that included parts of a rare interview with the leader of Afghanistan's ruling Taleban, Mullah Mohammed Omar, officials said.[/FONT][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The decision came after Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage and senior National Security Council officials told the organization's governors that it would be tantamount to granting a platform to terrorists. The governors then told employees to kill the story.[/FONT][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The Taleban had offered the organization an opportunity to interview Mr. Omar, which was done before the governors' orders.[/FONT][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"I was stunned, absolutely stunned," said an agency journalist who asked not to be named. "It goes against every principle of journalistic ethics."[/FONT][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][SIZE=-1]— "Taleban Interview Suppressed", International Herald Tribune, 2001-09-24, p.6.[/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]Perhaps the governors should request an interview with Richard Armitage about his trafficking in heroin (on behalf of the CIA) with warlord Khun Sa in the Golden Triangle (see Bo Gritz Letter to George Bush). Listeners to VOA would no doubt find this very interesting, if they were permitted to hear it.[/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]Censorship of UFO reports[/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]... is the story of how elements of the U.S. government, using standard methods of censorship and propaganda, as well as covert ties to well-known news organizations, attempted to hide the existence and activities of unidentified flying objects (UFOs) from the American public. ...[/FONT][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The author reviews the history of the UFO controversy for evidence of standard censorship methods and shows that, indeed, most of the same censorship techniques employed during other national crises have been applied to managing information about UFOs. This censorship, whether the result of a centrally orchestrated campaign or a remarkable series of coincidences, has made it possible for false and misleading information about UFOs to be foisted on the American public.[/FONT] [/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][SIZE=-1]— The Missing Times : News Media Complicity in the UFO Cover-up[/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]A variety of censorship occurs when a "news" source claims to provide information about some subject but actually ignores the important information and presents instead disinformation. A good example of this is the ABC program on UFOs that was aired in March 2005. Read more about this in Dr Steven M. Greer's Peter Jennings Defrauding: Inside the ABC News UFO Documentary Hoax. This is basically the way the US mainstream media works: providing sophisticated (or blatant) disinfo to hide what is really the case.[/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]Self-Censorship in authoritarian societies [/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]One important insight is how hierarchical authoritarian social systems function. Top down directives and commands, especially if they carry the weight of threats of censorship and punishment serve to keep any dissent in check. There is a great deal of self-censorship operating in all institutions in the United States. It is also important to recognize the role of a shared ideology among the decision makers, or perhaps more specifically the role of what social psychologists, in studies of organizational behavior, call "groupthink." Groupthink is decision making characterized by uncritical acceptance of and conformity with the prevailing view. Thus, the will of a few key persons can be spread within and across government agencies.[/FONT] [/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][SIZE=-1]— September 11th And The Bush Administration [/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]See also the book Into the Buzzsaw: "Leading Journalists Expose the Myth of a Free Press"[/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]Censorship of criticism of Israel[/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]Those who deny (in the words of Robert Fisk) "that the military occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip by Israel, its use of extrajudicial executions against Palestinian gunmen, the Israeli gunning down of schoolboy stone-throwers, the wholesale theft of Arab land to build homes for Jews, is in some way wrong" would like all criticism of Israel to be labelled as "antisemitic" thus branding the critic's statements as heinous and unworthy of consideration. This is a tactic designed to derail criticism of the actions of a state whose violations of the human rights of Palestinians have made it contemptible in the eyes of the world. Supporters of Israel, unable to refute such criticism, are now trying to make it illegal.[/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][A proposed] amendment to Title VI of the Higher Education Act ... [whose purpose is] to require denial of federal funds to any university whose faculty or students, perhaps even guest lecturers, make statements that are in any way critical of Israel ... is an echo of Nazi, Communist and other totalitarian forms of censorship.[/FONT] — Terrell E. Arnold: Against The Law To Criticize Israel?[/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]Some claim that the U.S. government has been subverted to serve the interests of Israel.[/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]On October 16, 2004 President Bush signed into law the Global Anti-Semitism Review Act. It establishes a special department within the U.S. State Department to monitor global anti-Semitism, reporting annually to Congress. ...[/FONT][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Here is a list of beliefs or activities the U.S. government now considers anti-Semitic:[/FONT][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]1. Any assertion "that the Jewish community controls government, the media, international business and the financial world" is anti-Semitic.[/FONT][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]2. "Strong anti-Israel sentiment" is anti-Semitic.[/FONT][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]...[/FONT][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]14. Alleging that Mossad was behind the 9/11 attack is anti-Semitic.[/FONT][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][SIZE=-1] — Rev. Ted, The Real Motive Behind 'Dept Of Global Anti-Semitism'[/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]See also: The Secret Relationship Between Israel and Oil: What the US Media Hides But it seems this site has been "disappeared"; read this article here.[/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]Some people (could they be Jews?) want to suppress not only any criticism of Israel, but also any mention of Israel. A philosophy professor has been fired for, among other things, allowing the students in his World Religions class to ask any questions they wish and for permitting discussion of Zionism. Unbelievable? Read about it here.[/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]Further remarks concerning Israel may be found in the section on Zionism.[/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]Censorship of reports of torture[/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Military autopsy reports provide indisputable proof that detainees are being tortured to death while in US military custody. Yet the US corporate media are covering it with the seriousness of a garage sale for the local Baptist Church. ... Anthony Romero, Executive Director of ACLU stated, "There is no question that US interrogations have resulted in deaths." ACLU attorney Amrit Sing adds, "These documents [in the ACLU report] present irrefutable evidence that US operatives tortured detainees to death during interrogations." ... A Nexus-Lexus search November 30, 2005 of the major papers in the US using the word torture turned up over 1,000 stories in the last 30 days. None of these included the ACLU report as supporting documentation on the issue.[/FONT] — Peter Phillips, Hard Evidence of US Torturing Prisoners to Death Ignored by Corporate Media[/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]A conspiracy of lies, manipulation and disinformation[/FONT] [FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]At this time in history, it is incomprehensible how a nation can enjoy the benefit of the most sophisticated communications technology in world history and remain so uninformed ... or dumbed down. The policies being carried out by the US government that are destructive, both domestically and around the world, are being conducted under a veil of secrecy. The only possible way this dumbing down or control of information could occur is that it has been socially constructed. It is a conspiracy of lies, manipulation and disinformation which increasing numbers of Americans are aware of and should be calling it treason.[/FONT] — Leuren Morat, THE KISS OF DEATH — NUCLEAR WEAPONS STEALTH TAKEOVER[/SIZE][/FONT]
Firstly if you want to criticise communism and the CCP, I'll join you, because I'm a advocate for democracy, and I hope one day China does become democratic. However the difference between myself and westerners is I prefer the transition to a democracy to be as smooth and stable as possible and that can only be achieved over a period of time (remember it took the British centuries to wrestle with the concept of democracy) but what the west wants is for China to become a democracy literally OVERNIGHT!! regardless of the consequences! eg. if the economy collapsed and widespread chaos ensured. All the west is concerned about is staying on top of everyone and getting rid of another communist state, not necessarily the welfare of the country and its people. I mean look at what happened to Russia? (Soviet Union) in 1990s when it became a democracy overnight? The country and economy collapsed and the Russian people starved, many had to queue for hours for scraps of bread to eat!! I can assure you many Russians remembered what happened in the nineties and they never want it repeated again. The only thing that saved the Russians in the end is their massive reserves of oil and gas, CHINA HAS NO SUCH LUXURIES especially in 1989, it was a very poor country back then!! Also isn't it strange how power in Russia today is becoming more centralised and the leadership becoming more of a dictatorship and less of a democracy with each passing day? with the full support of the Russian people?? Look how the Russians adore Putin even though he is practically a dictator!! just goes to show if you force democracy upon a nation regardless of whether it is ready for it or not, it can have negative effects!! and democracy isn't necessarily the panacea for all the ills in this world. Also remember nearly all third world countries have corruption, cover ups, bribery and other forms of bad governance etc (China is still a third world country) these are NOT exclusive to China. Remember the prosperity the Chinese people are experiencing right now is probably better than any other time in our history, and in some areas of China, people are actually having problems of obesity!! all this in a country with 1.3 billion people, thats why the majority of mainland Chinese do not want to rock the boat and bring down the leadership. When the west criticises China on human rights it focuses narrowly on the facet of "the right to criticise the government" but what about the right to have a job so you can have food on the table each day? so your children don't have to starve or die of malnutrition? What about the right to afford decent clothes for your family?? What about the right to have proper education for your kids? What about the right to housing and decent transport services? What about health care for your children so they don't die in the millions before the age of two like in India? etcTHESE ARE ALL HUMAN RIGHTS AS WELL!! and for the majority of Chinese the CCP have ticked these boxes! Yes, for those Chinese who openly challenge the CCP they will get punished and get locked away but these people are a minority!! Yes, I believe there should be a change, the CCP have done some things right but they have also done wrong, and a more open and freer society is the better option in the long run, but like I said the transition should be smooth with a strong emphasis on stability because you want democracy to improve people's lives not ruin their lives like what nearly happened in Russia. Lastly like A4agent said, if the west is consistant in what they do compared to what they preach, maybe other people might listen to them. Now, I expect you to give me a detail reply on this, not skipping and ignoring some of the important points I mentioned. thx.
Yes, I understand that democracy can be synonymous with anarchy, just like a democratically elect government in Iraq can freely choose to be hostile to the US or China or whoever. Democracy itself is not a panacea, but it is a better choice than being ruled by lies and liars. Personally, I could give two shits what "the west" or the US "wants" for China; the bottom line is, everyone in the world has an opinion about how they want you to be. You have to do what is in the best interest for your people. What do the Chinese people want? That is the only question that matters. China doesn't even need to be a democracy in the sense of a US style democracy. There is plenty of room for democracy under the Chinese Communist Party. Yes, you heard right; me, who has been railing about the Party now saying that there is room for the Party? And why not? If Bush et al can exist in the US, for all the vaunted talk about fairness, I can easily understand how it's not the system but the people involved. It's not that republicans are bad per se, but Bush et al were, and they happened to be republicans. They could have just as easily been democrats, or heavens no, ...Communist. Just like China in Imperial times, there were plenty of good laws, except for the bastards that only used them to suppress others for their advantage. China has good laws; except that it does not implement them or ever use them against the people that it should. It is exactly the same way as it was in imperial times; a criminal is guilty, but if he's connected, nothing will ever happen to him. Why do you think people riot? In the US there is a mantra for these types of social injustices, "No Justice, No Peace" There are billions of yuan a year being wasted on corruption. What exactly do you think people in China 89 was fighting for in Tiananmen? Why, just why, did nearly the entire country join in protests? Were they all students clarmoring for some barely understood romantic idea of democracy? And some people's rather pedestrian understanding of the entire affair was distilled into a manga like script of "Red Guard Commies" versus the "Capitalist Commies?" Where did they read that? In a comic book? No... They were all average men on the street that wanted to get rid of the nepotism, the corruption, the rip offs of the average guy. The only way that you could get ahead in China then wasn't from hard work; but by how much you paid to someone who was a connected party member. This was why people marched. This was why rural folks hopped on trains to go into the cities to join the protests. I watched news reports every day as it was happening and remember it as if it was yesterday. The Chinese people weren't fed up with the party, they were fed up with the party's corruption; just like they were with the corruption of the Qing, the corruption of the Koumintang, and now, the corruption of the CCP. Until the CCP is able to look itself in the mirror and say that China is more important than the party (and not the other way round), it has no place in China. Just because a nosy neighbor tells you that your shit stinks, doesn't mean that it doesn't. You may not like it that a nosy neighbor is pointing it out, but your shit stinks nonetheless. In this case, the CCP murdered hundreds of innocent Chinese who were really asking for the things that the party itself had promised them; honesty and fairness in governence, a government that really is 为人民服务, and not the other way around. THAT was the root cause of the protests; people saw their government as a lie. This is from wiki, but it's apt: That was from Animal Farm. For the Chinese, the Orwellian lament of some pigs being more equal than others remains the biggest problem. If you get rid of that, all the other problems would just go away as if by magic. And your comment of "...However the difference between myself and westerners is I prefer the transition to a democracy to be as smooth and stable as possible..." Are you suggesting that the "west" doesn't want that? Please, even the most unreasonable pundit (like Rush windbag Limbaugh) understands that it's in the world's best interest to have a stable China. In fact, if there were less corruption, China would become even MORE stable because there would be less protests, riots, and people coming to Beijing to seek audiences with the party and making a show for reporters from foreign nations. Again who's fault is this? The evil west? LOL...
So now your saying its not really the CCP's fault but the fault of some Chinese politicans!! geeze make up your mind please! NO, not everyone in China in 1989 supported the student's protests, if they did, the CCP would have been overthrown from power. Dude before you point fingers at China, nepotism and corruption and bribery etc is pretty endemic in third world countries, I mean can you give me examples of some third world countries who are free from them?? Dude I hate to break it to you, but all governments lie!! In the west you had the Iraq war, where the US and British govts insisted there were WMDs in Iraq and bamboozled their public into believing them. The cost of the war is astronomical and future generations will probably still be repaying the cost of it. Yeah I remember Animal Farm by George Orwell, I remember reading it when I was a teenager. I have to give credit to Orwell for depicting what happened in Russia after the fall of the Czar and the onset of Communism so cleverly in a book about pigs in a farm lol. One of the main reasons Communism has failed is because it actually believes in the creation of a utopian society is possible, unfortunately human beings are too flawed for such a lofty ideal. NO, greed and self interests (common human traits) is what makes this world go around!! Firstly let me ask you this, if the student protests in Tiananmen square in 1989 was successful would it had led to a smooth transition to democracy? or a tumultuous one?? And why did the Russians got so little help from the west when it became democratic?? Now to your question, does the west want a stable China?? presently the answer is yes, because of SELF INTERESTS!! because China's economy is strong and has a big impact on the world's economy, and China is a creditor nation and gives loans to western countries like the USA, but what would happen if China's economy was to suffer a disaster and the economy shrinks? and China becomes a debtor nation?? would the west still want commie China to be stable?? Don't forget the west regard China as a threat!! At the end of the day the only people who want the best for China is THE CHINESE PEOPLE!! westerners can preach all they want, because ultimately westerners regard China as a threat, and its an oxymoron to believe anyone who regard you as a threat to have your best interests at heart. Lastly theres no guarantee that if China becomes a democracy then corruption will disappear. I mean look at India for example, it has been a democracy for 60 years, yet it has a massive problem with corruption!! Don't forget to answer all my questions otherwise we won't get anywhere with this debate. The best way is to reply paragraph for paragrpah, the way I did it. Thx.
If you looked at what Zhao Ziyang tried to do as an agent of moderation and negotiation, this could have ended much differently. Moreover, look at the national congress and how the votes are carried out; it is more of a routine rubber stamp than an actual vote. That is where a lot of the problem lie. The only western analogy to this would be the electoral college, which is another pretty shitty system where voters are expected to vote as they are told. The only differenece here is, it is expected that they vote the will of the people, from reflection of the popular vote. In the PRC the expectation is that national congress announce the will of the party. This is the fatal flaw in the system, because the people serve the party and not the other way around. However, if there were benovolent leaders at the very top, even those that totally control the reins of power can effect positive changes, ...or not. Hence the fault of Tiananmen lies completely with the individual politicians at the top the Chinese government apparatus; with their individual actions and decisions. This is exactly what the hardliners feared, that the party was about to be ousted. They looked around the country and saw the anger and dissatisfaction of the Chinese people. But instead of listening to the people and look into the grievances (which was all the people wanted and the CCP could have easily done) they decided to send in troops. If you look back and actually read about the entire slew of complaints that were being offered from the people, there was NOT any sign or demand for the party to step down, only to address issues that the people wanted and airing of. Overthrow was not what the protesters were trying to do. Much like a child treated badly by his father, the child just wanted the father to listen to him; instead this father pulled out a gun and shot the child to shut him up. That is what Tiananmen represents to many Chinese. Most Chinese don't really care about western styled democracy; they just want to live with fairness in their lives and it could be under any political system. The word democracy simply represents an ideal for that fairness. Under the present system within the PRC, it could just as easily be delivered. It isn't because of the rampant corruption. I agree, however unbridled corruption would lead to political states like Zimbabwe. Should the people there keep silent because Mugabe is keeping the nation together while blocking 'western' influences out? He may be doing it but at what costs to the people? There comes a point of diminishing returns with everything and with military subjugation, that point is generally very easily broached. Break it to me? I've had my heart broken by liar politicians since the 1960's. I bet your parents probably weren't even out of diapers yet. And you're right, that "WMD" turned out to be Words of Mass Deception and not the doomsday weapons that the US military was sent in to seek. But look at main difference here; the US government is being put to task for it. It has to publicly answer for many things and admit that it chose the wrong path. Does the CCP have the same courage? Even if it lacks the same courage, can the Chinese people really insist (like the US does with it's vote) that their government answer for the things that it does? The answer is is no. THAT's why Chinese people, esp those in Hong Kong, are marching and protesting. And let me ask you; how much is it costing the Chinese people to keep them suppressed? The guns and monitors pointed without, as well as within? Where human beings are flawed but must be placed into positions of great public trust, there must be systems set up that recognize and mitigate such flaws. Else, we have only the inherent strengths and weaknesses of whoever happens to monarch, in the oligarch, or central committee. This is why certain Chinese emperors were recognized for the things they did and why others were loathed. It is a matter of human character that is the question. A modern US example would be the fatal flaw of the US justice system in the election of supreme court justices for life. This obviously renders the system to intense reliance on the wills of each individual jurist. Suppose someone like Mao or Deng sat on the US supreme court, what do you think would happen in the US? I shudder to think of it. Scalia and Thomas were bad enough. That is why Bush was able to win the election in the first place, a politically corrupt man was in the right legal place to rule in evil's favor (the final outcome of the Florida count that allowed Bush to gain the White House). This was what brought Bush to power. If this never happened, would the war in Iraq ever need occur? I'd seriously doubt that Gore would have even spend one thought on it. Animal farm is instructive here and Orwell was amazingly prescient and insightful of the minds of political men. You've just answer your former question with the latter. For an economically stable China any political transition must be smooth, be it to democracy or anything else. Heck, China may one day recognize a monarchy again. As for the US considering China a threat? Why do you suppose that is? But what kind of threat can mitigate a mutual economic codependence? If the PRC launched a missile at the US, that's real threat. Everything else takes a back seat to economic negotiations, period. Anyone that fails to understand that is being less than honest with himself. I'm in 100% agreement here. So, ...why then were Chinese people being shot by the CCP in Tiananmen Square? It seems to me that the Chinese people have spoken, and the only ones that listened was the west. The CCP has not only turned a deaf ear, but pointed a gun at its own people. The US had been a democracy and its still corrupt. Corruption never goes away. However, if you let it impact the daily lives of the people in an open fashion, then you incur the wrath of the people to whom you promised otherwise. In the US and other places, politicians get voted out. In some places of the world, politicians get shouted out; and in still other places of the world politicians get blown out. How do you want to see it happen in China? And remember this statement you made to me? Suppose now I demand an apology from you? What would you say? Here we're having a constructive dialog without the flame baiting. This is what happened in Tiananmen. The Chinese people wanted a dialog with its leaders. But their leaders called them a bunch of name and then shot them instead. Did the CCP need to do that in the name of 'preserving' China? No, just like you didn't need to call me names to disagree with me. The people are now demanding an apology. Does the CCP have the moral courage to apologize to its people for what it did? Do you have the moral courage to apologize to me for your flaming? LOL... It's all about character. Some people or governments have it, and while others don't. And some wouldn't know it even if it bit them on their behinds. The latter part of your statement is true; people care little for democracy when confronted with a struggle for their daily lives. This was the primary motivation for people to march and join the protests. It wasn't really for 'democratic' change, but for positive changes in how the people were administered; so that it would be less of a struggle in their daily lives. So what happened? They got shot for speaking out. What if I were to say, the best way to reply is to curse you out, like the way you did it? It's a lot less time consuming. LOL... The bottom line here is, who is hurting the Chinese people the most?
What I tried to do was to make a comparison between what happened at Kwangju in South Korea with what happened at Tiananmen square, to expose how empty and hypocritical the West's rhetoric about human rights and democracy were!! In other words if the US's actions in Kwangju was NO different than the CCP's actions in Tiananmen, then on what moral ground has the US govt got to lecture China on what happened at Tiananmen?? Its a simple question! And no, the West doesn't want a slow transition to a democracy. They wanted a revolution and chaos in China. I hate the commies because I could see that they are retarding the potential of the Chinese race. But I rather have this than a fooking bloody revolution. China isn't up to its potential but it is still growing at incredible rate. China isn't adverse to revolution, if benefits of a revolution outweighed the costs then the people would revolt. With the world fastest growing economy, there is no great benefit to a bloody revolution -- except for fooking whites. Magicguitar: LOL, Personally I would rather apologize to a wall than some self-hating white ass kisser. haha
He's been insulting me with race baiting comments during these discussions for a while now, and he doesn't seem to want to let up. Aside from his insults, he starts this "unrelated" thread simply to introduce red herrings arguments towards another pre-existing discussion? He's already stated as much, that this was really about Tiananmen. But, if he had wanted to talk about Tiananmen in the first place, then why launch a new thread about Korea, especially in a China forum? He could have just as easily brought up his same ridiculous points of Ignoratio elenchi distraction in the original Tiananmen thread. IE. Yes, the US did a very bad thing in Korea... But is that now supposed to be a qualified defense for someone arguing in defense of China and what it had done in Tiananmen Square? Hence, from where I sit, that's pretty much ignorance of logic; one event had nothing to do with the other. Which thus renders this an off topic issue here. It would seem more appropriate in the Korea section. If anyone cares to continue to discuss the history of the Korean student massacres; this thread should be moved to the Korean discussion forum.
