HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: "UCLA K.Y." <EDT2LRF@UCLAMVS.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Some thought about someone's thought....
Reply-To: "UCLA K.Y." <EDT2LRF@UCLAMVS.BITNET>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 17:42:00 GMT
Comments: To: ccnl <ccnl@UTARLVM1.BITNET>, china-nt <china-nt@UGA.BITNET>

Li Peng has the power to spent much more money than CSS here waiting
help from the US Congress and administration. Chinese government had
hired at least one D.C.-based lobby firm during some previous US
legislation relating to its China policy such as MFN. How much US
dollar paid to that service is a secrecy. But it surely surpasses the
ammount CSS donated to HQ, CSSA, and spent on FAX, stamps, and telegrams
because those Capital Hill lobby firms usually serve customers like AT&T,
American Rifle Assocation, and Middle East oil export countries. And I
don't think they would make big discount for Chinese government.

What's the result of that money power? The vote ratio on MFN bill, both
in the House and the Senate, are now more against the Li Peng's will.

If CG still believes money can hire anyone to serve its interest, it must
have hired President Bush to veto the bills that Li Peng doesn't like.

Now think about the 1989 TAM student demonstration. If money is a decisive
factor, then the failure of the movement must be blamed on the Stone
Computer Company and the Hong Kong "People Supporting Democracy
Assocation" did not send enough money to HIRE better leaders. So the
students did got leaders gmater and braver than Wang Dan and Chai Ling.

Finally, I'd like to know: starting from when ZHQ or HQ people were hired,
and if hired, by whom?

In the US or other democratic nations, people usually say they hired chairman
of their association. These are called "elected repesentatives" with respect

Even if we CSS would like to consider ZHQ and HQ chairman GX are hired
executives because they receive MONEY, then they are mainly hired by
Americans (as someone prefered, Uncle Sam) and businesses rooted from
Taiwan, because, according to IFCSS, most of the funds supporting its
operation were not from CSS community. So, we CSS from mainland cannot
proudly say "we hired ZHQ", "we hired GX" or even threaten to hire someone
else to replace any of them.

kevin at UCLA

------------------------------TEXT-OF-YOUR-MAIL--------------------------------

> From:         "(phil.physics.orst.edu)" <xia@PHIL.PHYSICS.ORST.EDU>
> Subject:      Re: Some thought about someone's thought....
>
> >From: dnmao@MICH.CERN.CH
> >Date:         Sun, 27 Sep 1992 06:39:32 +0100
> >Therefore, before we thank any 'leader', we should thank first our money and
> every individual's work. With money, we can hire Li HQ, Wang HQ, ZHang HQ...
>
> Oo, the author got this conclusion.  What do you think?
From: ping@bnlux1.bnl.gov (Shiping Zhang)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
Subject: Re: too far away from the topic (Re: Blood Card)
Date: 6 Oct 92 01:18:32 GMT
Organization: Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY 11973

In article <2ACBF0F5.7219@news.service.uci.edu> yeh@netix.com (Mr Shannon Yeh) writes:
>The discussions related to the blood card issue have been twisted too much
>in this newsgroup.  I am not not sure which group I belong to, but whichever
>group I am at, I will NOT use political lies to seek personal gains.  That's
>the key.

  How about seeking some gains through gambling on people's blood?

>Nobody cares how many green cards you got (or will get).

  That's exactly a lie.

>                                                           For example, your
>green cards have nothing to do with Shannon Yeh.  The issue is: Do NOT 
>politically lie!  Are you really in dangerous?  Do you really need protection?
>why do you have to sell the Chinese people and the Chinese government in 
>exchange for your personal green cards?

  How about selling CG's lies, in exchange for selling something back to CG?

>DO NOT FORGET: even if Bush passed this bill, and you got your green cards, 
>you got to remeber that these green cards are NOT free--you got your green 
>cards thru lying.  
>
>shannon
>-------

  Nothing is free.  For example, the free treatments (billed on Chinese
  people) in ZhongNanHai, Great Hall, embassies, consulates, etc. must
  be paid back (to CG) one way or another.  Apologying for CG is surely
  one way.

-ping
From: liuyh@vis.toronto.edu (Yuanhui Liu)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
Subject: Re: Conference, Sino-Tibetan Relations: Prospects for the future
Date: 29 Sep 92 15:50:43 GMT
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto

In article <BvCIx2.3IA@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca> richter@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (C. Richter) writes:
>In article <1992Sep29.021103.14076@marlin.jcu.edu.au> phsj@marlin.jcu.edu.au (su jianfeng) writes:
>>The whole Canada was taken over by force, because the first group of
>>whitemen arrived Canada by warships (the sailers of the ship had
>>weapons).
>
>Canada is trying to make amends by including minorities in the recent 
>constitutional negotiations.  They have participated whole-heartedly. 
>What is China doing?
>
yes, as long as the native rights doesn't bug the Quebeckers,
and they can't have whatever they want as long as whiteman can
build a huge dam or golf course on their /hunting/traditonal/scared/burial
land.  
>
>-- 
>Conrad Richter                     richter@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca
>Richters Herbs                     71550.3411@compuserve.com
>Goodwood, ON L0C 1AO Canada        Tel 416-640-6677 / Fax 416-640-6641
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: "Ignatius Y. Ding" <ding@HPSMTC1.CUP.HP.COM>
Subject:      Phone Numbers at the White House
Reply-To: "Ignatius Y. Ding" <ding@HPSMTC1.CUP.HP.COM>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 18:13:13 GMT
Comments: To: china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu

The following phone numbers are for gathering public comments at the White
House.  Anyone can call to leave his/her opinion or request for the Office of
the President.  Be sure that you leave your address and phone number with the
operators and you will get an acknowledgement from the White House at a later
time regarding your comments.

   White House Comments Line    (202) 456-7639
   The Office of the President  (202) 456-1414
   The Office of Chief of Staff (202) 456-6796

Good luck.


Ignatius Ding
SVDC Communications
From: txt15@po.CWRU.Edu (Tao Tao)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
Subject: Re: the 9201 letter
Date: 30 Sep 1992 14:27:47 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc12.ins.cwru.edu


If you don't know other person's background how could you understand 
the views he or she holds?  

Tao
-- 
p
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: "(Hongwei Du)" <hongwei@EE.FIT.EDU>
Subject:      problem
Reply-To: "(Hongwei Du)" <hongwei@EE.FIT.EDU>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 00:44:21 GMT
Comments: To: CHINA-NT@uga.cc.uga.edu

	I have not been receiving any mail from CHINA-NT for THREE days.
I wander what is wrong about it. Could any one give me a answer ?
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: deng@dd-ap.rhic.bnl.gov (dp)
Subject: Re: Lobbying Senators Thurmond and D'Amato
Organization: RHIC: (Au+79)-> Little BIG BANG <-(Au+79) Upton, NY 11973
Date: 26 Sep 92 15:23:01


Just my 2 cents:

Though D'Amato is a Senator, he's popularly regarded as a Senator with a
Representative mentality (a heavy weight in pork bearing;-), which is good
for NY. He was in hot water for a while stemmed from his brother's deals, a
Senate investigation committee cleared him of any wrong doing.

This year D'Amato is running for reelection. Anyone has seen his commercial
attacking the Democrat candidate as a "hopeless liberal"?  It's ugly but
effective, isn't it?  For various reasons, he's been distancing himself away
from Bush like a maverick. Maybe he rather runs as a Senator, not a
Republican which carries some nagative connotation in such a miserable
economic environment. On international issues, since he is very concerned
with Israel, he was for the condition to restrict weapons sales to the
mideast from China.  But when casting votes for the CMFN bill, he's
flip-flopping.

A side note, I heard from a friend that Californians will vote on term
limitations.  If passed, Pelosi will be out of job soon. That's bad news on
the Chinese issues. Since California has a large Chinese-American (or
American-Chinese) community, how many Reps and Senators care about their
wishes?


>>>>> In article <Bv3IF4.Aqp@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu>
>>>>> "Ignatius" == Ignatius Y. Ding <ding@HPSMTC1.CUP.HP.COM> writes:

  Ignatius> For other reasons, I found out that Republican Senators Strom
  Ignatius> Thurmond of South Carolina and Alfonse D'Amato have become more
  Ignatius> sympathical towards the Chinese issues than in the past.  From
  Ignatius> their recent letters to our members, we definitely can see the
  Ignatius> change in tone reflecting their doubts about Bush
  Ignatius> administration's assessment of China's improvements on human
  Ignatius> rights records and what to do about it.  We constantly
  Ignatius> communicate with federal legislators.  This latest change of
  Ignatius> attitude might come for various reasons which we may or may not
  Ignatius> be able to figure out.  Nevertheless, it is an opportunity to
  Ignatius> ride with the tide.  I suggest that each one of you call or fax
  Ignatius> both of them on S1216, stressing the need to protect the students
  Ignatius> and families from the totalitarian regime of human rights abuses.
  Ignatius> Focusing on the winnable senators will get better chance to
  Ignatius> suceed.
From: hee@acf3.NYU.EDU (Enhua HE,                                         ,                                   ,not ready)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
Subject: Re: more concern on protection bill
Date: 1 Oct 92 05:15:00 GMT
Organization: New York University

/* acf3:talk.politics.china / zhangw@chert.CS.ORST.EDU /  5:07 pm  Sep 30, 1992 */
>Hi,

>	As a "Group A" individual, I do appreciate the
>understanding of the "Group B" and "Group C (those who
>have obtained PR)", not to mention that some of them
>even actively supported the campaign, as shown in the follow article
>which was posted on net.  If you have read it before, please
>discard it.

>	I hope that S1216 would not divide CSS.  And I have
>reason to believe that most of us are mature enough to achieve that.
>Of course, there are always some persons who consider that they
>have too much stake in S1216 so that they could not tolerate
>any criticism to or even question on S1216.

>			Luo Ning


>==============================================================
>	Would S1216 Hurt Those Who Came After 4/11/90 ?
>        --- On immigration quota allocations and job market competition

>                     Luo Ning
>
>		... ... ... (skip) ...
>

Hi, there,

If you really don't want to divide CSS, how about discuss these
questions: "why S1216 can/does not cover Group-B? Does Gruop-A people
like to add Group-B people to share the same benefit? Why Group-B
people did not strongly argue the bill? ..."

Don't say more on "S1216 will also benefit Group-B". Peolpe are not so
easy to be fooled!

BTW, using "Group-A/B" is just for simplification of expression. Don't
be so sensative.

Thanks,

--ZW
/* ---------- */
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: Chi Shao <shao@ATHENA.CS.UGA.EDU>
Subject: (none)
Reply-To: Chi Shao <shao@ATHENA.CS.UGA.EDU>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 00:16:16 GMT
Comments: To: china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu

test!!
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: Wei Xin <wxin@CTR.COLUMBIA.EDU>
Subject:      TEST
Reply-To: Wei Xin <wxin@CTR.COLUMBIA.EDU>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 02:45:35 GMT
Comments: To: CHINA-NT@uga.cc.uga.edu

Sorry, it's just a test.
From: ifcss@WAM.UMD.EDU (IFCSS HQ)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
Subject: IFCSS HQ NR-4050: News from White House
Date: 5 Oct 92 20:39:36 GMT
Reply-To: IFCSS HQ <ifcss@WAM.UMD.EDU>
Organization: Indiana University
Comments: To: ccnl@utarlvm1.uta.edu, china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu

**************************************************************
IFCSS Headquarters News Release No. 4050       October 5, 1992
               NEWS FROM THE WHITE HOUSE
**************************************************************
Independent Federation of Chinese Students and Scholars (IFCSS)
   733 15th Street, N.W., Suite 440, Washington, D.C.20005
         Tel. (202)347-0017  Fax: (202)347-0018
                Email: ifcss@wam.umd.edu


               News from the White House
               =========================


     This afternoon, several IFCSS delegates, including Xiao Geng,
IFCSS President, Baoping He, IFCSS Vice President, Haiqing Zhao,
Chairman of IFCSS Student Affairs Committee, Heping Shi, Chairman
of IFCSS Committee on Public Relations and Government Affairs, and
Yingquan Ji, student leader at University of Minnesota, went to the
White House to meet with two staff members of the Public Liaison
Office. The IFCSS delegates came directly to the point. Having
expressed their appreciation to President Bush for the protection
he granted to Chinese students back in 1990, they pointed out that
S1216 was a logical extension of the Executive Order and expressed
their hope that the president will sign the bill into law. The
White House officials responded that the bill had already cleared
the Justice Dept. and Office of Management and Budget and that to
their best knowledge the president would sign it. Asked when the
president would sign it, the officials answered that there was no
time-table for it. They added that they would not put in writing
what they said.

     The IFCSS delegates also discussed some other issues with the
White House officials, including the arrest of Shen Tong and two
other students. IFCSS President Xiao Geng presented the officials
with a package consisting a letter to President George Bush, an
open appeal for Shen Tong and his friends signed by over 70
schools,  a collection of examples illustrating the uncertainty the
Chinese students are facing, and an introduction to IFCSS. In
return, each IFCSS delegate was given a package introducing the
White House. Both sides expressed the wish to stay in touch.

     This is certainly a positive sign, but it is not the time to
rest on your laurels. While we wish to express our thanks to all of
you who have worked so hard to promote the bill, we do not see any
harm if the president gets a few more nudges from the senators and
governors whose names appeared in our previous news bulletins.


                               IFCSS Headquarters
                               IFCSS Student Affairs Committee


***************************************************************
         IFCSS Headquarters Office    Signature
***************************************************************
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: "Ignatius Ding" <ding@HPSMTC1.CUP.HP.COM>
Subject:      Bush Vetoed S2808/HR5318 - Conditional MFN Bills
Reply-To: "Ignatius Ding" <ding@HPSMTC1.CUP.HP.COM>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 22:50:17 GMT
Comments: To: Dennis.D.Lee@Eng.Sun.COM, donovan@csl.sri.com, hknet@cs.wisc.edu,
              ho@mips.com, ifcss%WAM.UMD.EDU@uga.cc.uga.edu,
              joseph_ng%5y@hp0200.desk.hp.com, jung_lin%40@hp1900.desk.hp.COM,
              sdc@longhorn.Corp.sun.com, ggach@pandora.sf.ca.us,
              xwu@janus.Berkeley.EDU, cnd-us@sdsc.edu,
              melody@hpsmtc1.cup.hp.com, jchu@hpsmtc1.cup.hp.com,
              wuling@s1.msi.umn.edu, li@perry.berkeley.edu,
              jyee@eclair.berkeley.edu, Isaac.Chen@Eng.Sun.COM,
              ide!ide.com!cai@uunet.UU.NET, wwang@mail1.cis.umn.edu,
              china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu, ting_s_wu@ccnf.hf.intel.com,
              nguyen@drutx.att.com

Dear Friends,


Just learned that George Bush vetoed S2808/HR5318 - the Conditional MFN Bills
this afternoon.  An veto override drive is in the making in the Senate.


Ignatius Ding
SVDC Communications
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: yjj@neptune.ctr.columbia.edu (Yuan Jiang)
Subject: Re: Conference, Sino-Tibetan Relations: Prospects for the future
Organization: Columbia University Center for Telecommunications Research
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 04:38:03 GMT
X-Posted-From: neptune.ctr.columbia.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

In article <1992Oct3.030008.29321@cmcl2.nyu.edu> yangze@acf3.nyu.edu (Ze Yang) writes:
>wendong@uhunix.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu (Wen-Dong Tang) writes:
>
>
>Division increases hostality,
>mideast, former Sovit Union and Yogslava are good examples. Division
>do harm to ecnomic intercourse, while eroupean is unifying, I cann't
>understand why Mr. Tang encourage independence movement here.

There is a saying "good fence makes good neighbors."  So division
does not neccessarily increase hostality.  Peace is maintained when
good fence is built so that people's rights and interests are well
protected and increasing communication.  people with blood relations
tend to live together better.

There were so many times when Europe was tried to be united by force.
There were 1st and 2nd world wars and many wars before.  After 2nd WW,
the eastern Europe was basically united under one power by force, whereas
the western European counties were devided into small countries again.
However, people's countries' rights and interests were largely respected,
and it leads to a peaceful and prosperous western Europe.  Now they
are planning to reduce their fences at certain parts to increase their
communication and economic strength.

The US was started with 13 states with high deviding fences.  The fences
were graduaouly reduced.

Did democracy and self-determination build up the hatred among eastern
Europeans?  No, it was the forced unification led to the hatred
and it was the Stalinist and Tito education that led to the intolerance.
There are the old communists who try to keep their power and
prevent people to seek their legitimate interests.  Many of the
Soviet republics' borders were drown by CCCP to tear apart the ethnic
minorities.

Is the breaking up of the former Soviet a bad thing?  I don't
think so.  Wait 20 years when they finally learn how to respect
each other.

I hope Chinese will eventually learn that "the mellon will not
be sweet if you tear it from the stem with force."  (sorry, if
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: IFCSS HQ <ifcss@WAM.UMD.EDU>
Subject:      IFCSS HQ NR-4051:  Do not Relax
Reply-To: IFCSS HQ <ifcss@WAM.UMD.EDU>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 15:12:19 GMT
Comments: To: ccnl@utarlvm1.uta.edu, china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu

**************************************************************
IFCSS Headquarters News Release No. 4051       October 6, 1992
                    DO NOT RELAX
**************************************************************
Independent Federation of Chinese Students and Scholars (IFCSS)
   733 15th Street, N.W., Suite 440, Washington, D.C.20005
         Tel. (202)347-0017  Fax: (202)347-0018
                Email: ifcss@wam.umd.edu


                    Do not Relax
                    ============

    As of this morning, President Bush has not signed the
Chinese Student Protection Bill (S1216). Last night, Bush
suffered a major defeat in Congress when his veto on the
Cable Act was overridden. It is unclear at this moment if
this incident has any impact on the Protection Bill.

    Nevertheless, it is not yet the time to relax. We have
consulted with our legal advisers and friends in the Congress,
they all agree that we MUST keep the pressure. We need more
publicity, more petitions and more interviews.

    Do not relax!


***************************************************************
         IFCSS Headquarters Office    Signature
***************************************************************
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: richter@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (C. Richter)
Subject: Re: Conference, Sino-Tibetan Relations: Prospects for the future
Organization: UTCS Public Access
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 07:39:52 GMT

In article <liqiang.717891973@kramden> liqiang@kramden.nyu.edu (Li) writes:
>>>Now you are saying, "... the Tibetan people ...". Please clarify or you might
>>>as well just mind your own business.
>> 
>>What is your point?  Is this all you can offer to the discussion?   
>
>I was very serious that some terms should not be abused because abusing
>terms and confusing readers doesn't sound to me as a good attitude.
 
I think you have run out of meaningful arguments and are resorting to
absurdities.  Why don't you use your time more effectively by getting 
China serious about discussing terms with the Tibetans for a referendum 
on independence?  

>>the trend, and will be the trend for the future.  Empires have been breaking
>>up, colonies have been freeing themselves and are running their own 
>>affairs as independent countries.  China will eventually lose its 
>>colonies also.
>
>If this is all you want, that's pathetic because the concept "China's 
>colonies" just doesn't exist. Well, you can certainly hold on to it - your
>choice.

Thank you. 
-- 
Conrad Richter                     richter@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca
Richters Herbs                     71550.3411@compuserve.com
Goodwood, ON L0C 1AO Canada        Tel 416-640-6677 / Fax 416-640-6641
From: richter@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (C. Richter)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
Subject: Re: Conference, Sino-Tibetan Relations: Prospects for the future
Date: 30 Sep 92 19:33:45 GMT
Organization: UTCS Public Access

In article <liqiang.717872979@kramden> liqiang@kramden.nyu.edu (Li) writes:
>>Absolutely.  And if the US South wants independence then the question 
>>should be addressed, peaceably by referenda, I would hope.  Do you 
>>think the Tibetan people are capable enough to decide for themselves 
>  	   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>in a referendum?
>> 
>
>The use of the term "people" is very confusing and misleading:
>
>Adolf Hitler said, "Die Leute der Deutschland ...";
>Chairman Mao said, "The Chinese people ...";
>Saddam Hussein said, "The Iraqi people ...";
>President Bush said, "The American people ...";
>...........................................
>Now you are saying, "... the Tibetan people ...". Please clarify or you might
>as well just mind your own business.
 
What is your point?  Is this all you can offer to the discussion?   

>>Why not let each province and autonomous region decide in the same 
>>way Canada is deciding?  Are you afraid of the results?
>> 
>
>At the present point, it's just a waste of taxpayers' money. 

Or goes against deeply held designs over the Tibetan people.   
You certainly are entitled to your views on how tax money should be 
spent, but like it or not, self-determination is the trend, has been 
the trend, and will be the trend for the future.  Empires have been breaking
up, colonies have been freeing themselves and are running their own 
affairs as independent countries.  China will eventually lose its 
colonies also.

-- 
Conrad Richter                     richter@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca
Richters Herbs                     71550.3411@compuserve.com
Goodwood, ON L0C 1AO Canada        Tel 416-640-6677 / Fax 416-640-6641