HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: elelyc@nuscc.nus.sg (Y.C. Liang)
Subject: Re: F-16,pilots.
Organization: National Univ of Singapore
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 04:58:28 GMT

In article <1992Sep11.150258.119257@marshall.wvnet.edu> mth015@marshall.wvnet.edu writes:
>One of my Tawanese friends tald me the quality of Tawanese pilot and said
>" If the way break someday, most of F-16 pilot will dispear or be called
>back to there home by there parents or wife."
>I am wonding is it that bad? Welcome your answers.

I think your friend was making a joke or something.  Pilots are treated
differently in Taiwanese Air Force, much better life.  This is mainly to
encourage quality system and more confidence.  I was in the air force. 

Don't worry !
From: luqi+@FRODO.GANDALF.CS.CMU.EDU (Qi Lu)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Looking for friends
Date: 10 Sep 92 03:31:40 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.BuCF4u.5Is.2
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon
Originator: luqi@FRODO.GANDALF.CS.CMU.EDU

=========================  POSTED FOR A FRIEND ==========================

			   LOOKING FOR FRIENDS

If you are or know of any alumna or alumni of Shanghai Second Medical
College(Shang Hai Di Er Yi Xue Yuan) in class 1977(graduating in 1982) and
pediatric major, particularly the following persons:
			Huang Qin-Qin
			Hu Li-Min
			Yu Hong
			Li Shi-Wei
			Tan Fang
Please contact:
			Mrs.Wu Hai-Ming
			PO Box 113506
			Pittsburgh, PA 15241

=========================  POSTED FOR A FRIEND ==========================
From: jlam@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au (Lord Automato)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Chauvinism vs Humanitarianism
Date: 12 Sep 92 07:00:27 GMT
Organization: University of Melbourne


To some of those from mainland who hold a die hard chauvinistic view,
would you really like to see the invasion of Taiwan if Taiwan seeks independent? 
Would you not mind killing fellow Chinese in Taiwan just wanting to keep Taiwan 
as part of China? If you really love your country, your fellow countrymen, would 
you murder your brothers and sisters just becuase wanting to satisfy your 
chauvinism?  If you do, then you are worst than PIGS.

There is no way for Taiwan to fight against China, forget about those F-15, F-18,
...  Worry about the econmic invasion by the Japanese rather then the armed
invasion from your fellow countrymen. Wake up, do we still want to see war
amongst Chinese? What for? Who would gain anything from it?

Even Taiwan is independent, what would mainland Chinese lose? If mainland
China invades Taiwan, what would mainland Chinese gain from it? No war, no
struggle, just work out your own domestic problems and think less about agression,
this is the only way to prosperity ....

Lin Can
=========================================================================
.-- .... --- . ...- . .-. -.. . -.-. --- -.. . ... - .... .. ...
--. . - ... -. --- - .... .. -. --.        
.-.. .. ..-. . .. ... ... .... --- .-. - .-- --- .-. -.- .... .- .-. -..
                                                   .-.. .. -. -.-. .- -.
=========================================================================
                                          

Xref: sparky soc.culture.china:25222 soc.culture.hongkong:10633 soc.culture.taiwan:13092
From: stlin@stevelin.Eng.Sun.COM (Steven Lin)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,soc.culture.hongkong,soc.culture.taiwan
Subject: Re: I'm very disappointed in Chinese
Date: 10 Sep 92 17:10:29 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: stevelin

In article <1992Sep1.194111.25930@csl.sri.com> dchan@cisco.com (Derek Chan) writes:
>In article <1992Sep1.113239.12546@cs.mu.OZ.AU>, dht@mulga.cs.mu.oz.au (Joyous Dave) writes:

>|> I'm very disappointed in Chinese people.
>|> 
>|> I want to improve China, improve its people's living standard,
>|> improve its productivity, improve its economy, improve its
>|> stand in the world.  And I asked people to contribute suggestions
>|> to how to improve China.
>|> 

I am so disappointed in Chinese inefficient government and its policies.

After two trips to homeland in two years, I give up complaints and hope (that
wish China can be improved). CCP has raised a high slogan:

	Chinese people come from Taiwan, Hong Kong, and overseas 
	are warm wlecomed back homeland and will be treated in "FAVOR".

The fact is all Chinese people not living in homeland are treated like dirt.
They have to pay twice to three times more fees for domestic air ticket, ferry ticket,
admission to scenery spots, plus foreign currency exchange to pay for hotel.

When I went up Tian An Mem Gate, I paid three times more money just to see a noisy
square. When I went up to Huangshan (Yellow Mountain), I paid 32 FCE (10 RMB for
local people) for entering the park, and additional 30 FCE (10 RMB for local people)
for riding cable car to get on the mountain. This means that an overseas Chinese
will always be ripped off by paying much more money to get the service that is not
matched as that CCP claimed favor treatment or better service.

Besides the ridiculous claim of favor treatment, CCP regime does not treat Chinese
people outside China as Chinese, they are treated like foreigners when paying fees,
they are treated like dirt when they need service (worse than the service provides
for local people).  
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,iu.china
From: claudius@leland.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu)
Subject: Re: Territory of Ancient China : Stone Age
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 01:46:52 GMT

In article <9225200.20325@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> dht@cs.mu.OZ.AU (Joyous Dave baby) writes:
>**Period:
>
>About 30th Centry B.C. to 2183 B.C.
>
>**Area under Central Control:
>
>During the Stone Age, the Ancient Chinese Civilization occupied the
>area from Southern part of modern Manchuria down to North of Long River.
>And went as West as near the end of Yellow River.

I think this is a way too big estimate.  First of all, there was no evidence
that Huang Di controlled any of the territory north of the Yellow River (that
is, if he existed).  Second, "the end of the Yellow River" is in Ching Hai.
I don't think he even came *close* to controlling that far.  In fact, if his
realm even existed to present-day Xian, I'd be surprised.

Also, the farthest south that the first emperor of Hsia was recorded to have
reached was Kwai4 Ji4, which is *not* the present-day Kwai4 Ji4.  The present
day Kwai4 Ji4 is in Je4 Jiang1, but the ancient Kwai4 Ji4 was in Her2 Nan2.
From: CHENJC@QUCDN.QueensU.CA
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: To those pro-Shen Tong guys
Date: 5 Sep 92 18:06:01 GMT
Organization: Queen's University at Kingston

Shen Tong simply plays an idiot role in this international politics
game, directed by his AMERICAN ADVISOR. That's why many chinese don't
give a shit on his arrest (or you can call it grabbed/seized, as much
as you like).  You guys probably enjoyed ST's recent show too much,
and forgot you are just watching a play/game.
Unlike three years ago, now few and few people trust those so-called
D-fighters.

JC
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: zhuh@athena.mit.edu (Hui Zhu)
Subject: Re: Questions about "Shen Tong (grabbed)"
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 19:10:40 GMT

In article <PI.92Sep4183827@spica.bu.edu>, pi@spica.bu.edu (GARMARHARD) writes:
|> In article <1992Sep4.144225.388@athena.mit.edu> zhuh@athena.mit.edu (Hui Zhu) writes:
|> 
|> 
|> >   You mean this ST guy is not "protected"?  Then what's the hell US congress 
|> >   men
|> >   or many other "foreign devils" shouted loudly after his detention and
|> >   even went to Beijing directly try to interfer China's legal system?
|> >                                                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|> >   Give me a break.
|> 
|> Is there any real "legal system" in China? Give me a lot breaks. 

Do you really know what legal system is? :) Only US has a legal system? :)
Seems you do need a lot of breaks. :)

Even 4000 ago in China there is a legal system, though it may be a slavery
one, like 200 years ago in US.   Enough breaks? :) Hahaha


|> There is only one related thing which used to be heard every day and night:
|> Dictatorship of Wu2 Can3 (nothing) class. Since Lao3 Mao2 said CCP is 
|> the pioneer teem of this Wu2 Can3 class, 
|> 
|>  	Dictatorship of WC class = Dictatorship of CCP.
|> 
|> How dare you distorted our Great Leader Chairman Mao's brilliant thoughts!
                          ^^^
|> You try to replace the dictatorship by this "legal system"?! You will be
|> convicted to be a conuter-revolutionary! I will report this to Li Peng
|> tonight. Watch out! You capitalist running dog!

Hi, boy, could you speak without using "running dog" etc?  You stink.

Now let's go back to point: since Your "Great Leader Chairman Mao" said
                                  ^^^^^   
"Dictatorship of WC class = Dictatorship of CCP", then there must be a legal system
serving for this purpose for you.  And only this your own legal system will be able
                             ^^^                 ^^^^
to convict you as  "conuter-revolutionary capitalist ******* ***".  That none of
my business. :)


Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan
From: li@sicvax.enet.dec.com (Tong-Kang Li)
Subject: Re: Why don't you stay ?
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 18:57:53 GMT


In article <14SEP199222514466@deimos.ucc.umass.edu>, s9874194@deimos.ucc.umass.edu (s9874194) writes...
>In article <1992Sep14.020912.23248@nntpd.lkg.dec.com>, li@sicvax.enet.dec.com (Tong-Kang Li) writes...
>> 
>>In article <13SEP199210432939@phobos.ucc.umass.edu>, s9874194@phobos.ucc.umass.edu (s9874194) writes...
>>>In article <1992Sep11.091557.11196@nuscc.nus.sg>, elelyc@nuscc.nus.sg (Y.C. Liang) writes...
>>> 
>>>None of the above you mentioned represents SOVEREIGNTY. Hong Kong has
>>>all the above you mentioned, but nobody would say it is a independent
>>>country. Everybody knows that it is a colony of Great Britain. Most
>>>of the people in today's world know the problem of Taiwan: it is the
>>>result of the WWII and the cold war. Most people in this world would 
>>>not say it is a LEGITIMATE, SOVEREIGN country. 
>> 
>>>None of the above you mentioned represents SOVEREIGNTY. Hong Kong has
>>>all the above you mentioned, but nobody would say it is a independent
>>>country. Everybody knows that it is a colony of Great Britain. Most
>>>of the people in today's world know the problem of Taiwan: it is the
>>>result of the WWII and the cold war. Most people in this world would 
>>>not say it is a LEGITIMATE, SOVEREIGN country. 
>> 
>>If based on your theory, PRC was NOT a LEGITIMATE, SOVEREIGN country until 
>>she entered UN. Do you agree? If so, what was she?
> 
>Beijing entered UN after she was recognized by more than half of the
>UN members. However, before she entered UN, she was considered by UN
>the rebel of the KMT government. Again, the point is not what you
>think you are but what the others think you are.
>c.q.

1. the point is not what you think you are but what the others think you are.
and
2. UN was considering PRC as the rebel of the KMT government before 1971.

So do you think PRC should accept the fact "PRC was the rebel of the KMT
government before 1971"? If so, I guess history books in China should be 
rewitten.

Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan
From: elelyc@nuscc.nus.sg (Y.C. Liang)
Subject: I do not think so  
Organization: National University of Singapore
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 04:26:40 GMT

In article <BuFGy2.C4B@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> xlli@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (xiao-lin li) writes:
>
>There is no evidence that Taiwan government cares about mainland's
>human right. When mainland Chinese people need their voice, they were
>coward. Now they are buying F-16s. I don't see any good wishes from
>the Taiwanese government toward mainlanders. They are selfish and it
>is impossible for them to realize their ambition.
>
How do you verify your statement about "Taiwan government does not care
the huamn rights".  Taiwanese government has issued passports to Chinese
students during Tien-ann-man crackdown.  All the newspapers and TV
channels were full of support.  Students in Taiwan were also having
supporting movements in Taipei to the Chinese students in Beijing.

>If they still love China and the Chinese culture, the mainland is open
>to them. We have Yellow River, Yangtz River, Taishang Mountain, Great
>Wall, Beijing, Nainjing, Shanghai.... all only in their dream and
>text book. What do they have? Taipei? Never have any idea about it.
>They can come to American alright, but it is not theirs.
>
Yes.  These things are not only what you "have", but also what you should
"keep" and "cherish".  Asking youself, does Beijing government really
cherish them well.  Where are trees along these rivers.  Really, if you
bring a Taiwanese to see the Yellow river, he sees no difference between
it and Mississipi river if he has no Chinese culture in his mind. 
Therefore, culture is the important thing behind.  However, Taiwanese
government does try its best to preserve Chinese culture and educate the
people under this culture.  That is what we are proud of.  

It is not important that Taiwan does not have Yellow river as long as it
has the Chinese culture. 

>We Chinese don't like current government either, but things will change.
>We still love our culture, our mountains and rivers, our stories about
>beautiful woman Yang Guifei.
>

I like Yang Guifei too, but I think she was quite fat. (a little smile).
From: jlam@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au (Lord Automato)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: Insensitive mainland chauvinist view. (Was: Who Cares 150 F-16s.)
Date: 13 Sep 92 08:03:46 GMT
Organization: University of Melbourne


In article <1992Sep12.231414.10152@ms.uky.edu>, gang@ms.uky.edu (Gang Li) writes:
|> jlam@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au (Lord Automato) writes:
|> 
|> >The world has changed unless you don't want changes. 
|> 
|> All people want to change some thing, changes may be better may be not.
|> What should we believe? "READ MY LIPS" or learn some history fact?

So what is your point? Keep CCP for another 50 years?

Lin Can
=========================================================================
.-- .... --- . ...- . .-. -.. . -.-. --- -.. . ... - .... .. ...
--. . - ... -. --- - .... .. -. --.        
.-.. .. ..-. . .. ... ... .... --- .-. - .-- --- .-. -.- .... .- .-. -..
                                                   .-.. .. -. -.-. .- -.
=========================================================================
From: joe@astro.as.utexas.edu (Joe Wang)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: 150 F-16 to Taiwan
Date: 9 Sep 92 16:18:47 GMT
Organization: McDonald Observatory, University of Texas @ Austin

In article <1992Sep7.161956.2002@zip.eecs.umich.edu> cyc@z.eecs.umich.edu (Yi-Chieh Chang) writes:
>BTW, Isreal has 600+ F-16/F-15 fighters and 1000+ M1 tanks,

Along with difficult economic problems and trouble with the Palestinians....

Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: wangf@unixg.ubc.ca (Frank Wang)
Subject: Re: 150 F-16 to Taiwan
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 02:47:35 GMT

>cyc@z.eecs.umich.edu (Yi-Chieh Chang) writes:
>
>>I think the selling of F-16 is a good news to Taiwanese, especially TIers,
>>but definitely bad news for Chinese. Arm race is a bad thing for sure, but
>>when the bad guys got the gun what you can do about it ? You can either
>>unarm them or arm yourselves if you don't want to get killed.
>>Taiwan's buying F-16 is only a sign that all Chinese should learn and
>>remember forever that Taiwanese have every intention to make their own 
>>decision on their own future. Taiwan is Taiwanese business none of Chinese'
>>business. 
>

I am curious that how much these 150 F-16 can protect Taiwan if
there were a war break across straight.

F. Wang
Xref: sparky soc.culture.china:25530 soc.culture.taiwan:13347
From: stlin@stevelin.Eng.Sun.COM (Steven Lin)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan
Subject: Re: I do not think so
Date: 14 Sep 1992 17:58:20 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: stevelin

In article <1992Sep12.042640.14524@nuscc.nus.sg> elelyc@nuscc.nus.sg (Y.C. Liang) writes:
>In article <BuFGy2.C4B@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu>  (xiao-lin li) writes:
>>
>>There is no evidence that Taiwan government cares about mainland's
>>human right. When mainland Chinese people need their voice, they were

People from Taiwan donated millions to TAM incident, people donated millions
of cash and million tons of rice to last year flooding, some organization evn
built thousands of family unit house to help flooding victims. Do you call
that no care what so ever?

>>If they still love China and the Chinese culture, the mainland is open
>>to them. We have Yellow River, Yangtz River, Taishang Mountain, Great
>>
You guys openly support CCP so much. Don't you think it is self-confliction?

I don't see Yellow River, Yantze River has anything to do with CCP. Both
rivers indicate an evidence of failure management. Yantze River now is a 
river of pollution collector. What can you be proud of?

>>We Chinese don't like current government either, but things will change.
>>We still love our culture, our mountains and rivers, our stories about
>>
Bearing hope on CCP is a dead hope. If it can be changed, it would have
changed long time ago. A bandit nature of ruler will not lead China to
modern society. Don't even think of human right! You guys are dead of
human right!
From: yuanj@ucbeh.san.uc.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Democratic dictatorship (was RE: Mao's pleonastic oxymoron)
Date: 10 Sep 92 01:00:49 EST
Distribution: world
Organization: Univ. of Cincinnati

In article <9SEP199217552831@venus.lerc.nasa.gov>, fsbrn12@venus.lerc.nasa.gov (Andrew Hsu) writes:
> I was always of the opinion that Mao was a good writer. His articles are plain,
> persuasive, and tart. However, did he really know what he was 
> talking about? Now I'm not so sure. One of his famous articles was
> titled
> 
> "Lun(4) Ren(2)min(2) Min(2)zhu(3) Zhuan(1)zheng(4)"
> 

I spent at least 1 week worth of time on this article when I was in school
during those years.  He tries to tell people that they are actually the ruler
of the country that suppresses oppositions with no mercy.  Sounds good to those
rulers, not so to the ruled.  In those crazy years, no one seems to chanllege
his theories.  Nor did I.  But now, it is not worth snoy thing for me.  I think
that his presumptions are wrong.  People, ruling or ruled party, can make 
mistakes, and are imperfect.  His decieving theory, democratic dictatorship, 
just does not sound right to me any more.   He became a distator and lost 
democratic character completely.  He would not practice what he teaches beause
he is teaching impractical things.
Xref: sparky soc.culture.china:25502 soc.culture.taiwan:13318
From: joe@astro.as.utexas.edu (Joe Wang)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan
Subject: Re: Who Cares 150 F-16s.
Date: 14 Sep 92 05:37:23 GMT
Followup-To: soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan
Organization: McDonald Observatory, University of Texas @ Austin

In article <lb20lpINNegg@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> stlin@stevelin.Eng.Sun.COM (Steven Lin) writes:
>The collapse of CCP comes from inside, not outside. The facial strong and
>inner weak CCP is not going to stand long on the earth.

I don't think that the CCP will collapse.  I consider it much more
likely that it will follow the path of the KMT and carry out internal
reforms to produce a more open economic system.  Two consecutive party
general secretaries (Hu Yaobang and Zhao Ziyang) were removed and a
Politburo member (Hu Qili) was demoted because they believed in a more
open political system and were too sympathetic to calls for more
democracy.  It seems extremely unlikely to me that only the highest
ranking official in the CCP has these views.  It's more likely that
their views are shared by many party members who are following the old
Chinese tradition of thinking one thing while saying something else.

I'm pretty sure that after Deng dies, one of the current members of
the Politburo (perhaps Li Ruihuan, Zhu Rongji, or maybe even Jiang
Zemin or Zhao Ziyang himself) will turn out to be the Mainland
equivalent of Chiang Ching Kuo.  

There are a lot resemblances between CCP/PRC-1992 and KMT/ROC-1970.
One example is the nature of the National People's Congress meetings.
With each passing year, NPC delegates have been getting bolder at
challenging measures introduced by the government.  (At the last NPC
meeting, the Three Gorges project was a matter of intense debate.)  So
far, the NPC has not challenged the Party on a serious policy issue,
but the trend is clear.  

In the final analysis, I think the CCP will "KMT-ize" itself, not
because I trust the CCP (because I don't), but rather because I think
the CCP will realize what it needs to do to survive.  The people in
Beijing are not stupid.  They've seen that the CPSU in Moscow is dead
while the KMT in Taipei is very much alive.  I think the Beijing
leadership can figure out what it needs to do to stay in power.






Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: s9874194@phobos.ucc.umass.edu (YANG, Changqing)
Subject: Re: International Award for Shen Tong
Followup-To: soc.culture.china
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1992 01:46:00 GMT

In article <unreg-150992142112@woodbeck.ncl.ac.uk>, unregistered@newcastle.ac.uk (Fignatius Fink@Thunderbull) writes...

Hello, every one.

	As I have posted earlier, I admire Shen Tong's passion and
courage while I disagree his action. But I am fully embarrassed by
the following post. This kind of garbage should not belong to this net.
We, no matter what we believe, must learn to respect each other. We must
learn to behave ourself. We must change our own mentality before
we can really change China as well as the world.

	I challenge this guy put his real name and address out.
I sincerely plead every body satnd up to throw those kind of
garbage out of our net. Every body on the net spends huge amount
of time reading and posting. We deserve the respect from each
other. We shall not tolerate those kind of garbage.

	Please, everybody.
c.q.
=================================================================
>Dearly beloved netters, 
>   
>We are celebrating the Autumn festival this year with a petition for that
>celebrated idiot Shen Tong. We call on all members of SCC to sign the 
>petition below to honour our fellow moron, Shen Tong. Shen Tong the dunce,
>Shen Tong the numbskull, Shen Tong the pompous democrazee fighter. Shen
>Tong
>in an act of sheer lunacy unmatched in history has made us morons damn
>proud.
>A toast to brother Shen Tong!
> 
>Fignatius Fink
> 
>Secretary
> 
> 
> 
> 
>To President Bush,
>White House
>Washington D.C.
> 
>To Deng Xiao Ping
>Zhongnanhai
>Beijing
> 
>To Prime Minister John Major
>10 Downing Street
>London
> 
>To B B Ghali
>United Nations
>New York
>New York
> 
>We, the undersigned, celebrate the renaissance of Chinese idiocy as
>exemplified by our great brother, Shen Tong. Free Shen Tong now!
>Morons unite! Democrazees rule!
> 
> 
> 
>Name:
> 
>Email Address:
> 
> 
> 
>INTERNATIONAL FEDRATION FOR THE PROMOTION OF CHINESE MORONS
> 
>Fignatius Fink
> 
>Secretary
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan