HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: henryc@panix.com (Henry Chan)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
Subject: Re: F16 to Taiwan
Keywords: F16
Date: 9 Sep 92 01:42:00 GMT
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix & Internet, NYC

In article <Bu7KIu.J5K@multisys.com> rot@multisys.com (Republic of Taiwan) writes:
>
>Bush is playing game in order to win election. No one knows
>he will fulfill his 'YES' after he wins the election.
>It won't surprise me that if Bush refuse to sell F-16
>to Taiwan in the begining of his next 4 years' presidency.

Judging by President Bush allegience to Mainland China I wouldn't be surprise
of any last minute surprises,  Yes, Bush did promise to sell the F-16s, but
he didn't say how he would deliver them.
Picture this scenario; Dan Quayle, his poor sense of Geography, F-16s delivered
by his hands, and his slip-up he made during his Central American tour (some-
thing to the effect that he regret not learning latin so he can speak to the
people of Latin America directly).  Imagine the faux pas number he could say
about Taiwan?  Imagine the planes ending up in Thailand? (^-^)
Imagine the F-16 instruction manuals written in Korean.  It could be worst.


>Bush looses his face and votes. Next cut a deal
>with Clinton and formaly declare to buy F-16 when
>Clinton is the President of USA as a gift(Gen{look} Main{face} Li{gift}).
>Then Taiwan will have a chance to kick Bush's butt
>and have a good relationship with Clinton.

Might be a bad idea.  The KMT, Chiang Kai Shek was alive and leading, in 48
in its lobbying efforts on the American government to increase aid and funding
were frustrated by slow acting nature of President Truman.  Confidence in the
polls, which showed Truman likely to lose, the KMT openly endorsed the opponent
.  Truman surprised everyone and won the election.  But he never forgotten how
the KMT & China lobby confidently predicted his demise and deliberately held
intervention in China until it was too late.
Notice how Bush is refering himself as a Truman darkhorse these days?


>If Bush win, we still have French Fighters and we
>still kick Bush's butt.
Agree.


-- 
" I am from the planet Larson on the far side of the Galaxy" said the
space cow invading St. Canard -Dark Wing Duck

HenryC@Panix.Com
id <m0mTByz-0000GKC@crash.cts.com>; Fri, 11 Sep 92 07: 28 PDT
	id <ib26641@pro-amber.cts.com>; Fri, 11 Sep 92 07: 24 PDT
From: rsopicki@pro-amber.cts.com (Randy Sopicki)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
Subject: Re: Bush or Clinton?
Date: 11 Sep 92 14:19:31 GMT
Organization: ProLine [pro-amber] -- Spring Valley, Ca

In <1992Sep10.130008.4434@cbfsb.cb.att.com>
vinlai@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (vincent.lai) writes:

>> 
>> Bush: Well-known for protecting PROC.  Agreed
>> 	to sell Taiwan some very-outdated
>> 	fighter aircraft only because he wants
>> 	the Texas vote.  But if he gets re-
>> 	elected, at least there's a chance
>> 	that he might carry his promise of
>> 	selling the aircrafts through.

The F-16 is not an outdated fighter. Its still one of the top air superiority
aircraft around.
>> 

ProLine:  rsopicki@pro-amber
Internet: rsopicki@pro-amber.cts.com
UUCP:     crash!pro-amber!rsopicki
From: rot@multisys.com (Republic of Taiwan)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
Subject: Constructive?
Date: 15 Sep 1992 15:03:53 -0500
Organization: Multimedia Information Systems Corporation, San Jose, CA                        TEL: (408) 436-8929            E-mail: info@multisys.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu


This reminds me couple years ago how I argued 'constructed'
opinion with other netters from Taiwan.

Since than this kind of brain-washed terms seldom
posted by people from Taiwan, but it did sow up
a lot by the people from Mainland China.

It interested to know people in Taiwan already know
they are the master and the government is nothing
but people's managers(or slaves).

But, in the Chinese people's mind, after long time
brain-washed by CCP, they only know how to
serve CCP master by suggesting 'constructive'
opinion dare not criticize CCP with 'non-constructive'
opinion.

The most depress part is not many people from China
know the true meaning of democracy.

They seems care more about the glory Huge China
and are willing to back CCP up to start wars and
kill people.

When they are going to learn?
From: rot@multisys.com (Republic of Taiwan)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
Subject: Trade (Re: Who Cares 150 F-16s.)
Date: 13 Sep 1992 23:14:25 -0500
Organization: Multimedia Information Systems Corporation, San Jose, CA                        TEL: (408) 436-8929            E-mail: info@multisys.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

In article <1992Sep13.220452.3215@tamsun.tamu.edu> x0y3510@tamuts.tamu.edu (Xuejun Yang) writes:
=
=There was an evaluation a while ago by the Taiwanese premier calling
=people in Taiwan only small rich(Xiao Fu) but a poor big society. 
=40 % of Taiwan's GNP depends on trade versus only 20 % of Japan vs
=1% of mainland China. You can see why Taiwan is so dependent on a
=big foreign power.

It depends on how people interprets it.
Basically, we have nothing except some natural gas in Taiwan.
To a raw material poor country like Taiwan, it is not surprise to
find out we depend heavily on trading.

It is not good or bad. It is just a way to survive.
IMHO, Taiwan does survive pretty well, acturally extremely good.
From: rot@multisys.com (Republic of Taiwan)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
Subject: Re: Report
Date: 10 Sep 1992 14:34:56 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

In article <Bu36wH.H9G@acsu.buffalo.edu> chchang@acsu.buffalo.edu (Chun-Shi Chan
g) writes:
=Check out the article entitled: "A flirtation with innovation" which 
=appears in the September 1992 issue of Byte (page. 44).
=
=The author was in Taiwan to observe Computex, Taiwan's largest computer
=exhibition.
=
=There are several surprises in this article: 
=(1) In 1991, Taiwan accounted for 6% of Asia's PC shipment, but Taiwan
=    received only 2% of the $1.5 billion in sale.
=(2) In 1991, Taiwan's computer companies spent only 11.2 million in R&D.
=(3) In 1991, less than 50% of the Taiwanese PC carried their own brand
=    names.
=
=Conlusion? Taiwan's computer compamies are still emphasizing on low-price
=low-end OEM products. 
=
=-Chunshi
 
 
No one can make big buck from PC nowaday, but Taiwanese is
still making money. So where is the secret?
 
People always has some kind of illusion that we have to
make a final product with our own brand in order to make
money. Wrong, making parts is much more profitable than assemble
a final products with parts. Trading is even more
money in it than making thing.
 
Another illusion is we have to make everything.
Do we really have to make our own fighter?
But we need metal and steel.
So we make our own steel and secure the source of steel.
But we need iron. Are we going to conquer another
country in order to secure the source of iron?
 
Why don't we just skip all those trouble and buy anything we can?
Evil Irqg has no problem to get anything they want.
Why such a nice KMT can not get anything?
 
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: yewang@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Yenwen Wang)
Subject: Re: Territory of Ancient China : Qing Dynasty
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 00:24:13 GMT

In article <63780002@acf3.NYU.EDU> yangze@acf3.NYU.EDU (Ze Yang, , , ) writes:

>
>>1636 A.D. -> 1919 A.D.
>
>>**Dynasty:
>
>>**Area under Central Control:
>
>>.....
>
>Joyous, You did a great job here by giving those islanders
>a much wide sight field.
>
>Ze Yang

Hey, watch your words! These Chinese history are taught in ROC classrooms,
too. We also teach our kids Confucius, not Marx/Lenin/Mao's B***S*** :-)

Also remeber, CHINA is also a name given by foreigners!
Learn to listen to different voices. We have a long way to go
toward democracy and human rights.


-- 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
  Yenwen Wang                        wangy@kaa.eng.ohio-state.edu
  The Ohio State University          yewang@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: rot@multisys.com (Republic of Taiwan)
Subject: Re: The Foreign Minister of PRC said ...
Organization: Multimedia Information Systems Corporation, San Jose, CA                        TEL: (408) 436-8929            E-mail: info@multisys.com
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 12:56:01 GMT

In article <1992Sep3.114855.24335@engage.pko.dec.com> li@sicvax.enet.dec.com (Tong-Kang Li) writes:
=
=In article <Btwq0p.Dv6@multisys.com>, rot@multisys.com (Republic of Taiwan) writes...
=> 
=>Yes, KMT's Mongolia, Tibet, and  Mainland  China  has  burned  in
=>those  KMT  leaders'  bugheads.  They have been claiming that for
=>over 40 years. It won't be easy to ask them to  drop  the  claim,
=>but  it  would be easy just move those bugheads to the place they
=>claim they own for over 40 years and never step their foot on.
=
=KMT's claim of Mainland China is just like your claim of "Taiwan has been
=independent country for hundred years" in your previous message. If you 
=can make such claim certainly KMT can make her own claim. Fair?

Thank you for praising me as an equal of KMT. Unfortunatly,
Republic of Kailan still have got any Tax from you yet.
Please pay your tax to the government of Republic of Kailan,
before you say I am equal to KMT.  :-)

PS. the tax is $1000.00 dollar, casher check or credit card only.

Or are you suggesting no one should pay tax to KMT as
no one paying tax to Kailan?

=
=>So all the Taiwanese has to do is to move those people who  claim
=>they  own  Mongolia to Mongolia, move those people who claim they
=>own Tibet to tibet and move those people who claim they own Main-
=>land  China  to  Mainland  China.  Then all Taiwanese can sit and
=>watch KMT and CCP fight each other NOT in Taiwan.
=
=Unfortunately your idea of moving those people around will not happen but
=only satisfy your hatred.

Such a hateful person you are, Tom! If you enjoy hating people,
be my guest, but do not include me in your list.  ;-(

I am not suggesting 'moving people around'. I was only move
those people back to their so claim home or properties.
Shouldn't they take a look of their home or properties
and take care the people living on their home or properties.
I am mere having good intention to help those claimers
to reclaim their right of their properties.
What's wrong by helping those people to get back their own properties?

If they do not want my help, they certainly can give up
those claims any time. No claims from them, no help from me.

=
=Tom


Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: g803355@phys.nthu.edu.tw (Li-Jui Chen(Juh-TZeng Lue))
Subject: 22
Organization: National Tsing Hua University (HsinChu)
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 11:53:35 GMT
From: vaseem@berlioz.nsc.com (Vaseem Anjum)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
Subject: Import of Machinery from Taiwan
Keywords: Import Candle Making Machinery
Date: 15 Sep 92 21:19:59 GMT
Organization: National Semiconductor Corporation
Originator: vaseem@glass


I am interested in importing candle making machinery from
Taiwan. I spent a lot of time in my local library trying
to get info. on Taiwanese industries without success. I 
would be thankful to anyone who could direct me or guide
me in obtaining this information. 
By the way, some one suggested I contact the Taiwan Trade
Council. If you have the phone/fax number of this I would 
also appreciate it.

Thanks in advance.

Vaseem...
Phone Voice: (U.S) +001 408 721 5514 email vaseem@berlioz.nsc.com
      Fax  : (U.S) +001 408 773 0978


-- 
  ------------------------------------------------------------------	
   Reply	: vaseem@berlioz.nsc.com                             	
   {decwrl,hplabs,sun,pyramid,amdahl}!berlioz.nsc.com!vaseem 	
   Vaseem Anjum : National Semiconductor, MS D3677 Santa Clara 95052
From: rot@multisys.com (Republic of Taiwan)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
Subject: Report from Taiwan in Byte magazine
Date: 10 Sep 1992 14:35:33 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

In article <Bu36wH.H9G@acsu.buffalo.edu> chchang@acsu.buffalo.edu (Chun-Shi Chan
g) writes:
=Check out the article entitled: "A flirtation with innovation" which 
=appears in the September 1992 issue of Byte (page. 44).
=
=The author was in Taiwan to observe Computex, Taiwan's largest computer
=exhibition.
=
=There are several surprises in this article: 
=(1) In 1991, Taiwan accounted for 6% of Asia's PC shipment, but Taiwan
=    received only 2% of the $1.5 billion in sale.
=(2) In 1991, Taiwan's computer companies spent only 11.2 million in R&D.
=(3) In 1991, less than 50% of the Taiwanese PC carried their own brand
=    names.
=
=Conlusion? Taiwan's computer compamies are still emphasizing on low-price
=low-end OEM products. 
=
=-Chunshi
 
 
No one can make big buck from PC nowaday, but Taiwanese is
still making money. So where is the secret?
 
People always has some kind of illusion that we have to
make a final product with our own brand in order to make
money. Wrong, making parts is much more profitable than assemble
a final products with parts. Trading is even more
money in it than making thing.
 
Another illusion is we have to make everything.
Do we really have to make our own fighter?
But we need metal and steel.
So we make our own steel and secure the source of steel.
But we need iron. Are we going to conquer another
country in order to secure the source of iron?
 
Why don't we just skip all those trouble and buy anything we can?
Evil Irqg has no problem to get anything they want.
Why such a nice KMT can not get anything?
From: eaeu228@orion.oac.uci.edu (Steven Wei Wu)
Subject: Re: F16 to Taiwan
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
Organization: University of California, Irvine
Keywords: F16
Date: 8 Sep 92 01:44:08 GMT

In article <Bu7KIu.J5K@multisys.com> rot@multisys.com (Republic of Taiwan) writes:
>In article <BtzKL5.JKE@acsu.buffalo.edu> chchang@acsu.buffalo.edu (Chun-Shi Chang) writes:
>=In article <1992Sep02.215310.8526@jho.com> john@jho.com (John Ho) writes:
>=>

(Lines deleted, sorry.)

>Bush is playing game in order to win election. No one knows
>he will fulfill his 'YES' after he wins the election.
>It won't surprise me that if Bush refuse to sell F-16
>to Taiwan in the begining of his next 4 years' presidency.
>
>If KMT is not so chicken, KMT should paly game too.
>For example, spread rumor that Taiwan is going to
>buy French Fighters instead of Bush's F-16 to make
>Bush looses his face and votes. Next cut a deal

Yesterday (Sept. 6) on the front page of World Journal (New York edition)
said that rumer in Taiwan indicated that Taiwan is going to buy 60 French
fighters (instead of 120 as suggested by France before) at reduced price.
And Taiwan is also considering the offer of Su-27's by Russia.
Also Bush had sent a signed former letter to President Lee that says he is
willing to sell F-16's to Taiwan. Therefore there is no way he will back
out of this sale with those GM workers watching behind him.

>with Clinton and formaly declare to buy F-16 when
>Clinton is the President of USA as a gift(Gen{look} Main{face} Li{gift}).
>Then Taiwan will have a chance to kick Bush's butt

Also indicated by Clinton that he is going to honor the sale after he is
elected.

>and have a good relationship with Clinton.
>
>If Bush win, we still have French Fighters and we
>still kick Bush's butt.
>
>

Cheers!

Roger (vacationing in N. J.)



Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: heathd@ucs.orst.edu (Du Shi-hua Heath)
Subject: Re: a few question about taiwan
Organization: University Computing Services - Oregon State University
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 10:18:52 GMT

I don't think these are opinions.  What I think opinions are are the answers
of these questions.  If you think these answers are too personal, you can
e-mail to me.
Show your own opinion doesn't mean your opinion have to be perfect, and have
to be accept by all other netters.

>BUT, I don't tell people what they should do which means also
>what I will do, then it will be 'I am telling people what
>they should do'.

Don't worry about this, because you can't.  People have their own thoughts. 

>I believe it is not created by me. Mitch (the first self-claim TI-er
>on the SCS and SCT newsgroups) has discussed this issue several times.

Sorry, I am new in this group. 
>
>You seems confused a lot of issues here.

I am really confused. 
>
>ROC is an independent country. A country is composed by people.
>A country is not composed by KMT or CCP.
>KMT and CCP can claim whatever they want, but it does not
>change 'ROC is an independent country', though it does and did
>affect ROC's diplomatic relationships with other countries.
>
An independent country must have a government.  As you said it should be
composed by people, not by KMT or CCP.  But the current government is KMT's
government(as you said below, KMTs are hired by people to manage the country).
And this government doesn't admit Taiwan is independent.  Then where is the
government of the independent Taiwan now?  You can't call KMT's government is
the independent Taiwan's government.  

>Now, the country certainly can change her name anytime,
>if she desires it through a population vote.

As you said, if Taiwan is independent, why bother to declare independent
again, Taiwan has got a name, why bother to change it.  
>
>KMT is a group of people hired by the people to manage
>the country. Somehow this group of people is getting
>out of people's control and claiming 'KMT owns KMT's
>Tibet, Mongolia and Mainland China and preparing
>to invade and recover Tibet, Mongolia and Mainland China'

Here you get the history up side down.  KMT was found in mainland, its
repersentatives were from all parts of China.  "'KMT owns KMT's Tibet,
Mongolia and Mainland China" is not an idea which brought up after they flee
to Taiwan, it has been there since KMT founded.  KMT was not chosen by Taiwan
people, KMT chose Taiwan.  KMT have the right to recover Tibe, Monoglia and
Mainland China, it just doesn't have that power.  KMT is getting better
compare with what they were in 40's, 50's..., not wrose.  
>
>IMHO, KMT's claims and evil doing does not fit country(people)'s
>best interest.

What is people's best interest, job, living condition, or political rights? 
And what is KMT's evil doing?  
>
>So I suggest country(people) has a population vote to have
>a tighter control of the evil manager - KMT or replace
>another manager to suit country(people)'s best interest.
>
Good idea, but Taiwan is still a province, not a country. 
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: chchang@acsu.buffalo.edu (Chun-Shi Chang)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
Subject: Re: Republic of Formosa
Date: 7 Sep 92 04:39:17 GMT
Organization: State University of New York at Buffalo/Comp Sci

c_tsai@csd.brispoly.ac.uk (C Tsai) writes:
>Hello every Taiwan Independent supporter:
>
>[Although the Formosa is Spanish name....but if it is good name 
>why we want to refuse..

I hope that you are just joking. I believe Formosa is Portuguese
and is a name with some colonial flavor.

Isn't it weird you call yourself Taiwanese while using a
Spanish/Portuguese term to name your country?
Xref: sparky soc.culture.taiwan:13283 soc.culture.china:25462
From: joe@astro.as.utexas.edu (Joe Wang)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan,soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: old Her[4] and Christine
Date: 13 Sep 92 19:26:54 GMT
Followup-To: soc.culture.taiwan
Organization: McDonald Observatory, University of Texas @ Austin

In article <1992Sep11.031026.298@leland.Stanford.EDU> claudius@leland.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu) writes:
>In article <9209110231.AA17763@multisys.com> rot@multisys.com (Republic of Taiwan) writes:
>>He said 'get rid of those barbarian and recover Han'.
>>Mandarin is Chin's official tone and Chin was called
>>'barbarian' by Dr. Sun-Yet-Soon. So Mandarin is
>>barbarian's Mandarin, according to Dr. Sun-Yet-Soon.

>He was obviously referring to the Manchurians.

One thing that I admire about Sun Yat-Sen was the fact that he tried
(and largely succeeded) in getting rid of the anti-Manchu elements of
the 1911 revolution.  He could have easily used the Manchus as
scapegoats for everything that was wrong with China and portrayed the
revolution as a "race war."  He didn't.  Instead, the "min-zu zhu-yi"
part of his "three principles" was designed part to reduce ethnic
tensions among Chinese.  


Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: li@sicvax.enet.dec.com (Tong-Kang Li)
Subject: Re: a few question about taiwan
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 21:48:55 GMT


In article <1992Sep15.172011.20116@odin.corp.sgi.com>, yu@chang.asd.sgi.com (Yu Chang) writes...
>In article <BuM1yG.EI8@rlyeh.multisys.com>, rot@multisys.com (Republic
>of Taiwan) writes:
>|> In article <1992Sep15.021922.24902@nntpd.lkg.dec.com>
>li@sicvax.enet.dec.com (Tong-Kang Li) writes:
>|> =
>|> =I believe you are referring to my post #29557. Frankly, I dont even know
>|> =you why should I hate you? I dont believe anyone will hate you. You are 
>|> =not the only TI supporter on this net. We are not all KMT supporters, at 
>|> 
>|> This is a very intersting 'something' happens all the time.
>|> People seems love to frame the other people with a name
>|> or term.
>|> 
>|> It seems I have been framed as a Ti-er or TI-supporter
>|> all the time. Can't people think of something else
>|> except capping other people.
>|> 
>|> Did I ever say 'You, Li are such such-er'.
>|> 
>|> Now, this is a real name calling.
>                       ^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 
>It is very bad to do name calling. Any insult or word abuse is not only
>wrong but also showing his own indecency.
>I am sorry that you felt that you are insulted by Tong-Kang Li.
> 
>If you, Mr. ROT, thinks labeling you TIer is name calling, then I
>do not understand why you call yourself "Republic of Taiwan"?
> 
>yu
> 
> 
> 
>PS: The following is for Tong-Kang.
> 
>Tong-Kang,
> 
>I am ashamed of you wasting your time like this.
>Why talking back and forth iteratively again and again?
>In the beginning, this seemed to be interesting but don't you see
>this has been decended to a lower level that no one in his right
>mind should be at. I know you are bright enough to understand that
>there in no hope and it is time to gave up.
> 
>cheers.

When I saw people got attack but kept silent or a new reader just logged in
the newsgroup and asked a very common question on Taiwan got attack. I feel
so sorry for them. Moreover, the opinion promoting hatred, distorting facts,
etc. I feel someone got to say somthing about. So I did. I agree it is not
worthy and I will tone down.

Cease fire. :-)
From: yangze@acf3.NYU.EDU (Ze Yang, , , )
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
Subject: Re: Republic of Formosa(correction)
Date: 8 Sep 92 04:26:00 GMT
Organization: New York University

ifat555@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Ray Huang) writes:

>to begin his own dynasty. What the hell is the difference between TIers
>and Mao? This is why I hate TI!

There is simply no similarity.

>Ray Huang.

Ze Yang
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: cshi@cs.ulowell.edu (Chunde Shi)
Subject: Re: Territory of Ancient China : Qing Dynasty
Organization: University of Massachusetts at Lowell Computer Science
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 22:36:41 GMT

In article <Bu8A34.F21@acsu.buffalo.edu> chchang@acsu.buffalo.edu (Chun-Shi Chang) writes:
>yangze@acf3.NYU.EDU (Ze Yang, , , ) writes:
>>Joyous, You did a great job here by giving those islanders
>>a much wide sight field.
>>
>>Ze Yang
>
>I'd be very careful in using those words! 
>
>This is becasue, among other things, there are people whose habit is to
>collect meaningless utterances from jerks like you :-)
>
>So don't be surprised if you see your article cited someday as a proof of,
>uh, something like the "Necessity of Taiwan Independece".  
Those kinds of "wording" can be found anywhere, among people from 
different provinces in mainland, and among among people from different states 
in U.S.  Do'nt be too sensitive!


Xref: sparky soc.culture.taiwan:12994 soc.culture.asian.american:8890