HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Ye <stacc0@QUANTUM.FIU.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Clean up CHINA-NT
Reply-To: Ye <stacc0@QUANTUM.FIU.EDU>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 20:08:57 GMT
Comments: To: china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu

pi@BUAST7.BU.EDU writes:

|Anybody who tries to trigger debates in this network should be DEFINITELY
|purged from the network.

Let's start from purging this guy who tried to trigger a debate on
this network about what kind of person is allowed to post...

It's neither right nor effective to block any person from posting, some
netters have many accounts on many computers. What may be blocked is
the type of articles. For example, make CHINA-NT for announcement only.
Then we'll not see articles like 'what's good for China?' or 'analysis
of the immigration bill', etc. Those people can, instead, send one line
to CHINA-NT saying 'people who wants to read my article on such-and-such
may send e-mail to such-and-such for a personal copy'.

By the way, I am running an advertise agency specialized in selling articles
over electronic network. 8-).
From: zhuh@athena.mit.edu (Hui Zhu)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
Subject: Re: response to Mr. W. Dong and Mr. T. Bao's comments
Date: 7 Sep 92 01:57:20 GMT
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology

In article <1992Sep6.201530.26411@pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu>, echeng@pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu (Eddie Cheng) writes:
|> 	OK, so now you are talking about social disobienence, which is
|> fine.  But the major instrument of social disobience is to go to jail in
|> order to challenge the unjust law(s).  You do not cry about enemy locking
|> you up, but gladly accept the sentence and wish for a moral victory and/or
|> a big following such as a "lock-in" movement.  In this light, as in Gandi
|> and M. L. King case, the only way to support Shen Tong is to follow his
|> step and go to China to continue the challenging, instead of asking for his
|> release.


Ok, seems Eddie picked up the topic. :) 
My final word to Mr. Yan Shen: there is a good article on "China Spring" few months
ago discuss the theme of "social disobienence". It would give you some idea of
dealing with the situation in China non-violately.

Also, I suggest you read the Constitutions of both China and US before you
make any comments on them.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: wangf@unixg.ubc.ca (Frank Wang)
Subject: Re: My two cents about SHEN TONG
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 02:54:48 GMT

Was Shen Tong an one of the most wanted guy in 1989?
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: zhuh@athena.mit.edu (Hui Zhu)
Subject: Re: My two cents about SHEN TONG
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 18:48:10 GMT

In article <1992Sep4.213005.17631@acd4.acd.com>, jjs@iedv7.acd.com ( James J. Song       ) writes:
|> 
|> >Besides, in China, any orgnization is required to registered in PB first.
|> >Obviously, ST did not/or had no intention do that.  That violated the law
|> >already.
|> 
|> It seems you have already got some details. What about you just said above?
|> Let me remind you: don't make up things.

Make up things?  any evidence? :)  

|> 
|> Besides, based on the information from IFCSS, Shen Tong contacted the Chinese
|> government about his intention. It is your right to choose just to believe
|> what the Chinese government says and discredit what the IFCSS provided. But
|> is there anyway you and I can verify who is telling the truth. If the Chinese
|> government is honest, I don't think it is too difficult to get the truth out.

Hmm, from all the news by UPI or AP, I find NO such thing like "ST contacted the 
PB about his intention".  Beyond, did IFCSS say ST got the approvement? :)
Donot make up things this time. :) 

For me, if IFCSS or ST is honest, I don't think it is too difficult to get the truth
out. :)  


|> >Absolutely!  Meanwhile, even Chinese citizen also has the duty to obey all
|> >the laws in China.  Also, any foreign powers have NO right to interfer China's
|> >legal action/or system.
|> 
|> But you also may want to ask if the Chinese government should obey the
|> law they themselves made and whether they have ever done so.

Yes, CG has NO record of obeying the law. But how about some D guys?  Seems to
me they do Not obey US's law, either(Not just China's law).  Remember 
Wang Bingzhang?  Ask what he did ? and why he got "grabbed" even in this 
"freeland"? :)


|> What Chinese law has Harry Wu violated? He just visited a few prisons and it 
|> was the Chinese government officials who allowed him to do so.

Good question.  Great question.  You get the point here. :)

Just visit a few prisons? :) That simple?

Did Harry Wu tell those people he is carrying (hiding is more proper word)
a video-camera? :)  

He knows taking video is not allowed there.  Why he did not do that in any US secret
agencies? :)  Don't try to tell me everyone can take record of whatever he wants is
a basic human rights. :)

Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: XIAOJIAN@CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU
Subject:      Bo Xiong
Reply-To: XIAOJIAN@CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 00:47:00 GMT
Comments: To: china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu

Bo Xiong wrote:
>By the way, is your Chinese name "DENG Gang"?  A CSS I know of has been
>wondering for quite long time that how come a guy named DENG Gang in Univ.
>of Arizona told someone else that the PRC Consulate in L.A. wouldn't extend
>his passport not long after he mailed his passport to L.A. Consulate
>(he was/is NOT in Univ. of Arizona but not too far from W. DENG) ...

I never imgained that a CND guy Bo Xiong could be so ugly.

Yes, my Chinese name is Deng Gang. I heard that story from He, Qiming
and then told Chen Jian beacuse I did not anything serious about it.
But Chen Jian said the guy in ASU just told him and no one else, and ask
if he could tell tell this strange story to the guy in ASU (Arizona
State University) and told him my name. I said fine but just no more
people because Chen Jian was so serious. I just said I heard that from
a friend and refused to tell the name since I didn't want it more complicated.
But now, it is clear that the guy in ASU not only told Chen Jian but also
at least Bo Xiong, although he did tell his wife about his passport
extension. So now, thanks to Bo Xiong, we all have to show our names.

Who told that to He, Qiming then? Maybe Bo Xiong himself, maybe the guy
in ASU, maybe PRC counsulte because He also had some problem to extend
his passport at that time. Who want to hnow the fact please call
He, Qiming at (602) 327-9483 or write to him to Dept. of SIE,
U. of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721. Chen Jian and the guy in ASU, sorry
for mentioning you to defend myself. Just be careful not to make a friend
like Bo Xiong next time.

And Bo Xiong, you own me a public apology, or I reserve my right to see
you in court. A CND guy publicly spreaded rumor, my God!


William Deng
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: yjj@janus.ctr.columbia.edu (Yuan Jiang)
Subject: Re: "New" policy" and "Shen Tong was arrested"
Organization: Columbia University Center for Telecommunications Research
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 18:12:39 GMT
X-Posted-From: janus.ctr.columbia.edu
X-Posted-Through: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

In article <1992Sep2.040423.6258@ucc.su.OZ.AU> yongbai@physics.su.OZ.AU (Yongbai Yin) writes:
>	Can the "New Policy" be applied to the case of Shen Tong?  Apparaently,
>Shen had not got chance to do something "harmful" to China during this returningHave a look on what kind of excuses would be found for Shen.  Probabily, CCP
>will argue:
>		1.	He is not CSS.
He was.  He was not smuggled out from China.  He came out as a student
to the US on 6/5 or 6/6, 1989.  He has been a student in Brandai and Boston U.

>		2.	Crime was found after returning.
What crime?  Interviewing to people of all walk?

>		3.	"New Policy" does not concern what CSS have done
>			before left China.
CCP did not arrest him for his role before 6/4.  Otherwise, it would have
arrest him when he got in the country.

>		4.	"New Policy" is not a law formulated by legistive, so
>			the "New Policy" is not necessarily followed by
>			executive department.
Even it's the law, CCP can break it any time.

>		5.	The "New Policy" will be executed after approved by
>			the "Rubber Stamp".
>		6.	"New Policy" can be only applied to 95% of CSS, but
>			not the rest.

Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: jjs@iedv7.acd.com ( James J. Song       )
Subject: Re: My two cents about SHEN TONG
Organization: Applied Computing Devices, Inc., Terre Haute IN
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 21:30:05 GMT

In article <1992Sep4.033924.3807@athena.mit.edu> zhuh@athena.mit.edu (Hui Zhu) writes:
>
>Now the question is: Does What ST did violate any law in China?
>Maybe or maybe not.  None of us have any information on what he did
>in China at all.  It is really tough to make judgement.

But we can make judgement based on the past if information is not 
provided by the authority who arrested Shen Tong. 

>Therefore, it is still too early to rearch any conclusion on whether
>ST is innocent.  One thing in China is different: there is no assumed
>innocent like here in US.  This is also the same in Japan. The legal
>system is different.

Another thing in China is different from US and Japan: the government
does not have to spell out what law you have violated if you are arrested.
There is always an equation: arrested = violating the law.

>Dose China PB has the right to "grab" him(detain him) ?  
>Yes, if PB has evidence to suspect him engaging in anti-government
>actions, it does have the right to detain him for questioning.

Chinese government certainly has right to arrest anyone it wants because
it has the power and more importantly guns.

>Besides, in China, any orgnization is required to registered in PB first.
>Obviously, ST did not/or had no intention do that.  That violated the law
>already.

It seems you have already got some details. What about you just said above?
Let me remind you: don't make up things.

Besides, based on the information from IFCSS, Shen Tong contacted the Chinese
government about his intention. It is your right to choose just to believe
what the Chinese government says and discredit what the IFCSS provided. But
is there anyway you and I can verify who is telling the truth. If the Chinese
government is honest, I don't think it is too difficult to get the truth out.


>Absolutely!  Meanwhile, even Chinese citizen also has the duty to obey all
>the laws in China.  Also, any foreign powers have NO right to interfer China's
>legal action/or system.

But you also may want to ask if the Chinese government should obey the
law they themselves made and whether they have ever done so.

>Also, unfortunately, some Chinese, especially some Gaodeng(higher level) hua ren(Chinese),
>or PR, choose to violate the laws in China, such as Harry Wu, etc, and then seeking
>so called "protection" from Uncle Sam. 

What Chinese law has Harry Wu violated? He just visited a few prisons and it 
was the Chinese government officials who allowed him to do so.

>Fully agree.  Also, no personal attacking, rumor making, CCP labeling,
>and verb abusing should be involved in any argument.

Agreed. Let's be civilized.
___
From: txt15@po.CWRU.Edu (Tao Tao)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
Subject: Re: Bo Xiong
Date: 5 Sep 1992 18:05:12 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc12.ins.cwru.edu


Fix your poor english first.

Tao
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: "Ignatius Ding" <ding@HPSMTC1.CUP.HP.COM>
Subject:      Clinton/Gore Visit San Jose
Reply-To: "Ignatius Ding" <ding@HPSMTC1.CUP.HP.COM>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 22:12:45 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-editor@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, china@diva.berkeley.edu

Democratic presidential candidate Bill Clinton and his running mate Al Gore
will visit San Jose and meet with the South Bay area voters on Tuesday,
September 15, 1992.  They will arrive at 2:00PM after their campaign trip to
Orange County, the hard core Republican heartland in southern California.

They are scheduled to make campaign speeches in front of the Clock Tower on the
San Jose State University, circled by San Carlos, San Fernando, Fourth, and
Seventh Streets.  Silicon Valley for Democracy in China (SVDC) plans to send
representatives to meet with them in person and to invite them to attend an
education forum on 1992 General Election sponsored by the local Asian-American
groups in October.  The forum will be a first of its kind sponsored by the
business, professional, civil rights, and human rights organizations to provide
opportunities to the area voters to exchange information and have direct
dialogues with candidates for presidential, senatorial, congressional, state,
and county offices.  SVDC and Asian-American Community Involvement (AACI) will
be among the co-sponsors.  The tentative schedule for the forum is 2:00PM -
5:00PM on October 18, 1992.  It will be held at Cupertino High School at 10100
Finch Avenue, Cupertino (Phone 408-257-3348).
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: zhu@cs.UAlberta.CA (Eric Y. Zhu)
Subject: China? What China?
Organization: University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 21:58:22 GMT


China is a country that it is simply too big to be ignored by 
the rest of the world. 

As some of you may have noticed if you've followed America's
Presidential campaign close enough that both Clinton/Gore and
Bush/Quayle have repeatedly claimed that the cold war is over,
Communism has disappeared from the surface of this earth, etc.
I would agree with the first point. But Communism no longer 
exists? What about China, then? 

When Soviet Union was changed color, one may have imagined that
China would've probably emerged as a main threat to the ``free 
world''. However, it seems to me that US has never taken China 
very seriously when it comes to the possible rivalries on the
international arena. China's repeated abstantion from UN's
resolution (Desert Storm, etc.) has also supported such a claim.
And now that Bush has lifted 10+year ban on arms sale to Taiwan 
(F-16) and totally ignored China's protest. It again shows yet 
another evidence that China has no impact whatsoever in America's 
decision-making and play insignificant role in world's politics. 

Another possibility, of cource, is that in Bush's mind (and Clinton's),
China has moved away from Maxism far enough in its market-oriented
economic reform that is no longer considered to be an authentic 
Communist country in following Marxism doctrine.

I am just wondering how many of you still believe that China is strong
enough to have a say in the world.
--

===
Zhu Yuchen, Edmonton
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: cshi@cs.ulowell.edu (Chunde Shi)
Subject: Re:      Russia: Chaos or back to dictatorship?
Organization: University of Massachusetts at Lowell Computer Science
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 23:15:43 GMT

In article <Bu8C5F.CwH@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> XIAOJIAN@CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU writes:
>
>"Shock therapy" only have made the bad economy even worse. Free most prices
>overnight only dramatically lowered people's buying power and made life time
>someday when they cannot stand anymore, go to chaos or back to dicatorship.
>William Deng
Correction:
  1. Yeltsin's "Shock therapy" was engineered by a professor from Harward
University, It was a cover story in Time magazine when He did it and was
praised by
the magazine for his "talent";
  2. Yeltsin has promised he is not going to have next term;
  3. Russians thought they can be like West Europeans get aid from U.S. and 
other West nations, They were so naive. U.S.'s Marshal Plan was to build up
Europe against Soviet. There is no free lunch;  
     Given the recent history of Russia, When West nations invaded Soviet
Union. Westeners took no prisoners, executed all Bosheviks they captured.
Soviets were burtalized, and became immune to brutality through tight control
and military build, and they became brutal themselve. Unlike Westen world
when face tramendous challenge from Communism, they adopted some humane masure
to change the working class's condition. Soviet Union had dictatorship,
difficult to adopt new situation. They were facing terrior of nuclear disaster
constantly, when Soviets found out they are not going to be brutalized by
West as they were during 20s, they gave up everything for a piece of mind
without worrying nuclear bombs. That was another reason behind soviet
collapsed. 
   4. The direction of Russia is not clear, but there is tremendous sentment
among general population and many elites that Yeltsin's bowing West policy
should be stopped, going China's way.
Chunde Shi

Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: Xiansheng Duan <xdg8661@UXA.CSO.UIUC.EDU>
Subject:      comment on F-16 sales
Reply-To: Xiansheng Duan <xdg8661@UXA.CSO.UIUC.EDU>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 16:37:08 GMT
Comments: To: china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu

Calm down, gentlemen or gentlewomen. Business is business. We, American, can
make thousand millions from this deal, why should I care about your damn
,third class, underdeveloping country. Only your foolish government spent
thousand millions you people's blood money to save our hopeless
automobile companies. Are you proud of your generosity ? Fine. Please spend
more money to buy our so called "high-tech military equipments". I know you
guys can never compete with us in so called " advanced killing technology "
fifty years down the road. Save me from the sluglish economy, Save me
from the re-election. Or put more money (discount from these sales) into
my private account. God bless you guys ! God bless your great country !
Bitch .
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: Haosheng Zhou <philz@ee.umanitoba.ca>
Subject:      Suggestions again, please save it this time
Reply-To: Haosheng Zhou <philz@ee.umanitoba.ca>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 05:48:12 GMT
Comments: To: China-nt <china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu>

For those netters who support these suggestions, please save a copy of
this file and post it to this net as frequent as you want.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi, netters,

I am very sorry to see that my suggestions, especially the second one
(the follow-up), posted in this net, have caused some misunderstandings.
Here is another version of my suggestions. I hope most netters could
accept it. As these are only suggestions, there will be no further
definition for terms such as what is 'respect,' 'tolerate,' and
'responsible' etc. Yourself, the netters, are the interpreters. For
example, if you think your posting is responsible to all netters, then
please feel free to post it. Most suggestions only encourage you to TRY.
If you do not want to try, then never mind. Especially if you do need
negative attitude in your postings, ignore 7) below.

I believe that the more netter try my suggestions, the better the
discussions will be. I also believe that my suggestions are acceptable
for most netters.


Regards,

Haosheng Zhou


                       Suggestions to All Netters
     -------------------------------------------------------------

These suggestions are designed for promoting healthy discussions in this
net. You are encouraged to follow these suggestions when in discussions.
Use your common sense for interpreting the meanings of these suggestions
as there will be no official meanings for them. If you do NOT want to
follow these suggestions, it is O.K. In any case, these suggestions
should not be interpreted either as a censorship against the freedom of
speech or as a constitution for this net.

     -------------------------------------------------------------

1) try to respect, understand and tolerate your opponents;

2) be responsible to all netters;

3) stop discussions when you cannot convince your opponents after
clearly expressing your ideas;

4) try to concentrate on related topics;

5) try to be rational, not emotional; Try to be as specific as possible
in discussions; Try to give clear definitions for important concepts,
especially for those related with China, Chinese people, China's
interests etc;

6) try not to post your response immediately if you feel that you are
too emotional, rather, re-think about it and post it on the next day;

7) try to be positive, not negative; For example, instead showing how
others' are bad, try to show that you may have better ideas;

8) try to avoid using nasty words such as 'shit' in your postings.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: cshi@cs.ulowell.edu (Chunde Shi)
Subject: Re: IFCSS HQ SR-4032: Open-Letter on Shen Tong Arrest
Organization: University of Massachusetts at Lowell Computer Science
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 21:26:34 GMT

In article <BuFq5L.3C7@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> IFCSS HQ <ifcss@WAM.UMD.EDU> writes:
>****************************************************************
>policy regarding overseas students has deepened.
>
>Although studying abroad, we are genuinelly concerned with
>development and progress in our motherland. We believe that the
                             ***************
                             Is it U.S.A. ?
>above-mentioned arrest was politically unwise and morally
>unjustifiable, an incident that could not but discourage the
>
>(signed)
>
>
>***************************************************************
>         IFCSS Headquarters Office    Signature
>***************************************************************


Newsgroups: talk.politics.china