HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: joy@quip.eecs.umich.edu (Chien-Chung Chen)
Subject: Re: Stereotype of TIers
Organization: University of Michigan EECS Dept., Ann Arbor
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 07:56:02 GMT

In article <MhX=Vc_@engin.umich.edu> echang@engin.umich.edu writes:
>
>In article <1992Dec23.132831.9104@zip.eecs.umich.edu>, joy@quip.eecs.umich.edu (Chien-Chung Chen) writes:
>> I have no problem with most of your remarks. But here could you give
>> the netters some examples to sustain your arguments that the stereotyped
>> terrorist image of TIers could have been the product of the KMT propaganda?
>> Please cite your resources and evidences. I suspect the stereotyped
>> image of KMT propaganda has been the product of TIers' propaganda. :)
>
>Well, I am reluctant to reply to someone who asked questions simply 
>because he/she wanted to practice his/her English; however, I think I'll do
>my best to help him/her out.  :-)

No. I asked those questions not because I simply wanted to practice my
English. I did have question in mind. You got my motivation wrong this
time. On the other hand, you seem to argue politically with me in your
posting. You don't just want to practice English with me, do you?

>	I've already cited the "Formosa Event" as an example to illustrate
>the powerful KMT propaganda.  If that cannot help you, how about the
>military brain-washing classes (JYU3 KUAN1 ZOO4):  "A tiny bunch of evil
>overseas TIers" sounds familiar to you, doesn't it?  

Hey, why do you mention JYU3 KUAN1 ZOO4 to me? Because you know I am a
"him" not "her", right? Then why you use "him/her" stuff to describe me?
You little creep. :)

Do you still remember those JYU3 KUAN1 ZOO4 stuff? It's shit, I know.
But it's long time ago and I can't even remember what they told me.
It has very little influence on my impression on TIers.

"A tiny bunch of evil overseas TIers" do not automatically become
terrorists in my mind if they don't do anything related to terrorism.
For example, Peng Ming-Min is never considered by myself as a
terrorist, while Wang Hsing-Nan and a guy who tried to assassinate
little Jiang (Is his lastname Zheng? Forgive my fainting memory.) were.
Let's say some (not most) TIers consider themselves as revolutionists.
Their behavior is somewhat too radical.

Some people say WJ is KMT's newspaper and is anti-TI. It's supposed to
have some KMT's propaganda. From the papers I've read these years, I
don't think WJ paints TIers or Pro-Tiers as terrorists. A bunch of mobs,
yes. But mob is hardly equal to terrorist.

>	Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

-- Chien-Chung Chen
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: joy@quip.eecs.umich.edu (Chien-Chung Chen)
Subject: Re: more than 50% support TI
Organization: University of Michigan EECS Dept., Ann Arbor
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 23:23:53 GMT

In article <1ha24sINNk3@pollux.usc.edu> mcyang@pollux.usc.edu (Bien-Chao Iunn) writes:
>In article <BzKwGA.3Ht@ulowell.ulowell.edu> cshi@cs.ulowell.edu (Chunde Shi) 
>writes:
>>When "36%" became a "big win", I thought it was less than 50% and minority.
>>I could be wrong. You got to be ready to hear anything when you talk to TIers.
>
>If we count in those votes to the main stream KMT candidates, such as Chen 
>Jer-Nan, Wu Zee, Lin Yu-Shian, etc, who support "One China, One Taiwan" 
>policy,  more than 50% of Taiwanese have voted for Taiwan Independence.

Hmm, not so fast yet. In this election, independence or unification is
not the main topic. It can hardly tell from this election that people
want whether independence or unification. I think some people voted
against KMT because of their anti-"Gold-Cow" attitude.

-- Chien-Chung Chen
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: ykhsu@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (yung-kao.hsu)
Subject: Re: more than 50% support TI
Organization: AT&T
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 20:17:16 GMT

In article <1992Dec28.183258.15056@cbnews.cb.att.com> liaohen@cbnews.cb.att.com (Heng-Hsin Liao) writes:
>...
>The questions above do not mean that I am pessimistic on independence.
>What I am saying is we need to think about a lot of issues and prepare
>for those before an independence referendum is held. The key thing is
>this is under our own control although it won't be easy.
>
>Yes, we need some "time." But what we need it for is to prepare for
>our future instead of watching the world goes by. Sitting and watching
>just won't work the issues out. Agree?

	Though I have tried not to post anything about TI or unification,
	I am a bit bored in this holiday season. So...

	I think many TIers are working with the wrong agenda. To reach
	the goal of TI, like it or not, China is the key. As long as
	TIers continue to confront CCP face to face, the goal of TI can
	only move backwards. In the smaller scale, what's the point of
	having shouting matches with pro-CCPers in the netnews; you win no
	understanding but bad feelings toward each other.

	IMO, arguments like Taiwanese is (not) Chinese, TI can acquire
	international recognition, or China will not attack because of TI
	only create problems for TI. Those who buy such arguments have
	already supported TI, making such arguments more only further
	alienate those who don't buy them. Bottom line, even if you win
	the argument, you lose.

	Time is valuable for TIers not in preparing Taiwanese for an
	independence referendum but a

		CHINA POLICY aimed at reducing hostility and promote
		understandings (though China may not like what we
		will do with our future)

	This is what true TIers should work on and help execute it.
	And the beauty of it is that it also applies to those pro-unific-
	actioners. That is, despites ideological differences, they are heading
	to the same direction.  As for those who don't want to make a decision,
	like me, I cannot think of one reason why you will oppose it?

	Let time decide what we will do when circumstances change while we
	attempt something will help our causes no matter what may happen.
	Certainly, this is not doing nothing.

	In a political sense, regardless of one's political belief, there is
	a common and urgent mission for every one in Taiwan. Both DPP and KMT
	should be demanded of such mission instead of playing ideology games.
	I know this is naive but it is also so obvious and easy to understand.

	Trust is established by understanding and willing to understand.


Yung-Kao Hsu


Xref: sparky soc.culture.taiwan:16502 soc.culture.china:33444
From: v999rke8@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan,soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: Taiwan vs Mainland To The Extreme
Date: 23 Dec 92 15:53:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1992Dec23.052453.14023@u.washington.edu>, seb@stein.u.washington.edu (-s e b a s t i a n-) writes...
> 
>	<homeless discussion and flames are over and done with, 
>	 no need to bring it up again.>
> 
>>   Who cares whether taiwanese are rich or not? It has nothing to do with 
>>me.
> 
>	if u don't care then why don't u just f*ck off, gees.
> 

> 
>>How many TIers are like you? I wish there are many. Nobody would worry about 
>>a flock of boneless, and homeless political prostitutes.
>>
>>Oh, by the way, you know a lot of English bad words. Where did you learn 
>>them?
>>Hsi
>		oh by the way, where in the hell did you come from?
>		your mother's ass?
>		i don't want to use bad language or word and there's
>		no need for you to force me to.

      You must come from the ass from other than a human and you mother 
clean your mouth with a piece of dapper. You know nothing but bad language.


Merry Christmas and never see you again.

> 
>	outta here, it's christmas. /seb	
>	i'm gonna go watch a good old chinese movie:
> 
>                           ;;                                           
>       ;;;                ;;;                               ;;;;;;;   
>      ;;;;;               ;;;                       ;;   ;;;;    ;;   
>        ;;;;              ;                        ;;;;;         ;;   
>         ;;;          ;;;;                          ;;;;         ;;   
>         ;;         ;;        ;                      ;;;         ;;   
>                   ;;;   ;;;;;;                      ;;;         ;;   
>     ;;;;;;;;      ;;;;;     ;;                      ;;;     ;;  ;;   
>    ;;;;  ;;        ;;       ;;                      ;;;   ;;;;  ;;   
>        ;;;         ;;    ;;;;;                      ;;;;;;      ;;   
>        ;;;         ;;;;;;;;;;                       ;;;         ;;   
>        ;;;         ;;                               ;;;         ;;   
>        ;;;;        ;;     ;;;;                      ;;;         ;;   
>         ;;;;       ;;;;;;;;;;;                      ;;;         ;;   
>          ;;;       ;;       ;;                      ;;;         ;;   
>          ;;        ;;       ;;          ;           ;;;         ;;   
>         ;;        ;;;;;;;;;;;;       ;;;            ;;;    ;;;;;;;   
>        ;;         ;;;             ;;;               ;; ;;;;;;;;;;;   
>   ;;;;;;;;;;;     ;             ;;                   ;;;      ;;;;;;   
>  ;;;    ;;;;;;;;               ;;                                    
>              ;;;;;;;;;       ;                                         
>                 ;;;;;;;;;;;;;                                          
>                                                                        
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: yjl@cs.brown.edu (Yi-Jing Lin)
Subject: CRN Polls
Keywords: Rumor, Polls
Organization: Brown Computer Science Dept.
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 22:36:01 GMT

      	       	     	      1992 CRN Polls
------------------------------------------------------------------------

To help us understand the myth of <soc.culture.taiwan>, please answer the
following questions honestly and mail it back to <yjl@cs.brown.edu>. The
result of this poll will be published 100 days from now (12/21/1992).

Multiple Choices:

___ 1. What are the major reason(s) you subscribe soc.culture.taiwan?

      (A) Watch dogs running;
      (B) Learn some new dirty words;
      (C) Watch people fighting against each other;
      (D) Read weird stories;
      (E) Pretend to be busy when boss is around;
      (F) Learn some exotic theories of political science.

___ 2. What are your favorite command(s) when you read this news group?

      (A) n: skip to the next unread article;
      (B) k: mark as read all articles with the same subject;
      (C) K: same as k, but make it permanent;
      (D) c: catch up, mark all articles as read;
      (E) author kill: kill all articles from the same author; 
      	  (only available in tools like xrn(1).)
      (F) u: unsubscribe the newsgroup.

___ 3. What kind of relationship should be kept between
       <soc.culture.taiwan> (sct) and <soc.culture.china> (scc)?

      (A) One China: sct should be merged into scc;
      (B) Independence: No cross-posting allowed;
      (C) Confederation: All articles should be cross-posted;
      (D) One China = ROC: All articles in sct should be cross-posted to scc;
      (E) One country, two systems: All articles in scc should be
      	  cross-posted to sct;
      (F) One China, one Taiwan: Articles are posted separately, but
      	  some day in the future they will be sent to the other group.

Rumors: (True or False)

__ 1. Some authors of those pro-unification articles are actually
      pro-independence. They post stupid and insulting arguments 
      to make people resent mainlanders.

__ 2. Some authors of those pro-independence articles are actually
      pro-unification. They post stupid and insulting arguments to make
      mainlanders invade Taiwan out of anger.


Insanity and Paranoid: (Fill in the blanks.)

1. Who are the most crazy authors in this news group:
   (1) ___________________ (5 points.)
   (2) ___________________ (3 points.)
   (3) ___________________ (2 points.)

2. Who is the best author in this news group:




************* Yi-Jing Lin, Cable Rumor Network, Providence. ***************
From: npchen@bohr.physics.purdue.edu (Nien-Po Chen)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
Subject: Chong1 Guang3 broadcast (Was Re: Excellence, Made in Taiwan)
Date: 2 Jan 93 20:36:03 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Physics Department

For those interested in Chong1 Guang3 broadcast,

In	US Eastern zone:	 5.950 MHz
	US Central zone:	11.775 MHz
	US Pacific zone:	15.440 MHz
	Central American:	11.855 MHz
	South American:		15.130 MHz
				17.805 MHz

	Europe:			 9.610 MHz
				15.270 MHz
This is not a strict table.  For example, you, in Texas, may find the program 
more clearly if you tune at the frequency for Central American.
				
To receive the programs, you need a SW radio (Short Wave).  SW radios are 
available in many consumer electronic stores, including Radio Shack and Sears in
US.

Digital tuning is preferred.  Or, analog tuning with many bands(7 bands or more)
is OK.

Those programs are **different** from those of 'voice of free China', but  
are identical with those of Taiwan's NewsNet of Chong1 Guang3 (FM 107.8 MHz ?)
from Taiwan time AM 6:00 to AM 9:00.  I personally recommend the 30 min. program
'Newspaper degest' at AM 6:30 (Taiwan time).

Another personal experience to share: if the programs schedule conflicts your
work schedule, you can setup a timer and a cassette recorder to record the
programs.

Hope this may help.

Chen, Nien-Po		npchen@physics.purdue.edu
Jan. 2, 1993
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: changhp@engin.umich.edu (Hsiou-Ping Chang)
Subject: The Wolf and the Lamb (was Re: Election in Taiwan)
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 92 15:38:04 EST
Organization: The University of Michigan
Reply-To: echang@engin.umich.edu
Originator: changhp@fijan.engin.umich.edu


In article <BzMvAw.E2y@ulowell.ulowell.edu>, cshi@cs.ulowell.edu (Chunde Shi) writes:
> You are not going to get TI. We not only do not give dawm about you TIers, 
> also your foreign master on the Taiwan issue.
> Jiang Zhe Ming warned if TI, china will take "resolute measure."(Duan4 Ran2
> Chuo4 Si1).
> I was even supurised by the phrases used. You may be Chinese enough to know to
> meaning of the wording.
> 
	Tell us Chunde Shi, if this is a general point of view of mainlanders
or you just used it accidentally?

This remind me of a story:

The Wolf and the Lamb
---------------------

A Wolf came upon a Lamb straying from the flock and felt reluctance
about taking the life of so helpless a creature without some plausible
excuse: so he cast about for a grievance and said at last:
   "Last year, sir, you grossly insulted me."
   "That is impossible, sir," bleaded the Lamb, "for I wasn't born then."
   "Well," retorted the Wolf, "you feed in my pastures."
   "That cannot be," replied the Lamb, "for I have never yet tasted grass."
   "You drink from my spring, then," continued the Wolf.
   "Indeed, sir," said the poor Lamb, "I have never yet drunk anything
but my mother's milk."
   "Well, anyhow," said the Wolf, "I'm not going without my dinner," and he
sprang upon the Lamb and devoured it without more ado.

---Aesop's Fables

	So many times, I've seen the debates in SCT ended this way : "If you
don't buy my arguments, you will regret that CCP will use force to 
'liberate' Taiwan." 
	It seems to me that the image of Taiwan, in some mainlanders' minds,
is as weak as a lamb; they think they can use force easily as a final resort if
everything doesn't work out as they've planned.  Who gives them this image?
I suggest that we remind these mainlanders of the fact that
the China wolf will lose one of its eyes, two of its legs and possibly 
all of its teeth if it dare to take any violent action against Taiwan.
Don't hesitate to tell them.  Robbers only rob those who look weak and want
to submit themselves to violence.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: u333057@twncu865.ncu.edu.tw
Subject: We Taiwanese have won this election
Organization: Computer Center, NCU, Taiwan, R.O.C.
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 19:34:24 GMT

    The general legislature election had been ended last Saturday(19/12).The Tai
wan ruling party KMT lost this election.The Democracy Progress Party(DPP)won 
this election.102 new legislators are KMT's,50 new legislators are DPP's,9 are 
other party's or no party.
    Although KMT is still the ruling party,but they(KMT)lost many of Taiwan 
electorate's votes.About 31% votes are voted to DPP,DPP won the best votes & 
seats in any election than before.They(DPP)have about 18 seats legislators 
before this election ,but this increases to 50 seats for DPP!Because the ruling 
party KMT have many faults this year,so they got lower votes.It's a serious 
warning for KMT.If the ruling party go on doing many things wrong,they will be 
down & the ruling party will be changed.
    I think it's the real democrary.Which party is better,people will want them 
up.And if the ruling party is bad,couldn't satisfy us citizens,we'll let them 
down & chang the ruling party.We could chose the ruling party by our own votes.
No one(including govenment,ruling party,army force etc)could interfere our 
choices.
    We Taiwanese have told all over the world that we could have good real 
democracy on our own.We have the newest congress,& we'll chose our own presiden 
t by our own.
    When will you Chinese chose your own government by your own?
                               Tsao Yi-Wen(A university student in Taiwan)
                                          (Please forgive my poor English..)

Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: liaohen@cbnews.cb.att.com (Heng-Hsin Liao)
Subject: Re: Election in Taiwan
Organization: AT&T Bell Lab
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 15:47:15 GMT

From article <BzMu8I.z4r@austin.ibm.com>, by tylee@leety.austin.ibm.com (Ty Lee):
> In article <1992Dec21.160926.15558@zip.eecs.umich.edu> cyc@quip.eecs.umich.edu (Yi-Chieh Chang) writes:
>>
>>Every country formed in this world cannot avoid bloodshed unfortunately.
>>Even given the birth to a baby can't avoid bloodshed, so why are you so 
>>afraid of bloodshed ? If so, I don't think you can even have a child.
>>Besides, who can guarantee that there won't be bloodshed if KMT united with
>>CCP ? In fact, there may be lot more bloodshed if CCP come to Taiwan.
>>
> 
> It is the real intention revealed by a TI terrorist. They want bloodshed 
> no matter what would result. They stay in the US and gladly see the blood
> shed from somebody else's body as long as the blood did not drain from their
> own body. See the grim face behind the mask. Why does this gentleman not let
> his daughter's blood shed from her body involuntarily by other people?
> 
> Anyway, I hope this is not the typical attitude of a typical TI terrorist.
> 
>>So, man, forget about CCP, its history in Taiwan.
> 
> No, we can neither ignore the inherent threats from the CCP, nor the
> hidden threat of the TCP (Taiwanese Commuist party) headed by Lee Teng-Hui.
> 
> 8-D.
> 
> 
>>Yi-Chieh
> -- 
> /* The opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect those of IBM's.         *\
>  * Take care and have a nice day.                                            *
> \* Ty Lee                                                                    */

Seems to me that you just cannot catch up with the speed of change in
Taiwan. If there exists any TI terrorist overseas (w.r.t. Taiwan), he/she
must be joking. Taiwan does not need any terrorism to make its own
decision. Taiwan does not need any foreigner to help it's decision making.

I also heard that President Li used to be a Communist in his early days.
Then what? In the early days of Communism, young bloods joined Communist
Party mostly because of its idealism not its terrorism. What's wrong
with one joined Communist Party? What's wrong with the late Chiang Junior
joined Communist Party? What's wrong with President Li joined Communist
Party? It tells me that they both have some sort of idealism in their mind.
I am afraid that your anti-Communism thought is based on your fear of
Communism.

Heng-Hsin

Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: li@sicvax.enet.dec.com (Tom Li)
Subject: Re: more than 50% support TI
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 20:17:03 GMT


In article <1992Dec31.195407.6214@cbnews.cb.att.com>, liaohen@cbnews.cb.att.com (Heng-Hsin Liao) writes...
> 
>After unification, assuming Taiwan is a province of China, Taiwan won't
>be anymore a "political entity." There is no reentrance issue since
>China is already standing still in the international society. 20 million
>people get back to international society because they become people in
>China. Question is do we get our fair share or not? Why they treat HK
>with no respect even before they get it back?

I thought this has been our common understanding that unification will come 
only when "China" becomes a free, democratic, and wealth-balanced nation. 
And this new "China" is not born yet. 

>When China will become a democratic country is out of Taiwan's control.
>Do we want to keep "status quo" all the time and anticipate that the
>day will come at last? In my opinion, before China becomes a
>democratic country, the separation of several provinces is quite
>possible.

It is possible and may not be a bad thing. China has splitted and united 
several times. What's a big deal.
From: ykhsu@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (yung-kao.hsu)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
Subject: Re: Election in Taiwan
Date: 21 Dec 92 15:13:39 GMT
Organization: AT&T

In article <1992Dec20.210517.29857@zip.eecs.umich.edu> cyc@quip.eecs.umich.edu (Yi-Chieh Chang) writes:
>
>Cheer for Taiwan independence ! Cheer for DPP ! Cheer for democracy !
>Down KMT, down CCP.

	Cheers for Taiwanese; their voices will force KMT not to do
	business as usual, and their voices have given DPP a platform
	to prove themselves not only as an opposition party in the
	future. Cheers for both KMT and DPP as political entities.

	Down with ideological doctrine and self-serving politicians.

	Haven't shouting slogan for a while; it is a bit embrassing :-)


Yung-Kao Hsu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: nlu@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu)
Subject: Re: China(was More than 50% support TI)
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 05:42:46 GMT

In article <1993Jan4.043258.28493@zip.eecs.umich.edu> joy@quip.eecs.umich.edu (Chien-Chung Chen) writes:

>Growing "wheat" for fertilizer? I get confused by both of you.
>Could some kind soul explain this to me?

I guess I was wrong.  At the first reading, I interpreted his remark to say,
"with fertilizer" instead of "for fertilizer."  But after thinking about it,
I guess you can't have places that can produce wheat *and* three crops of
rice.  So, my apologies.

(But then, I don't think you can really count "weeds" as a harvest, if that
is what he meant.  After all, I can grow weeds in the back of my garden,
at least three times a year; does that mean that I get three harvests out of
my (unfertilized) backyard?)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan