HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dnmao%mich.hepnet%LBL.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
Subject: To W. Deng
Date: 3 Sep 92 22:55:33 GMT
Reply-To: dnmao%mich.hepnet%LBL.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu
Organization: Indiana University

W. Deng,

You have gone too far. Being peremptory just can make your image more urgly.

Seems to me that you do not know a very basic truth: To help Japanes to
control china and occupy china was beyond WangJinwei's right. That was why
if he had been alive after the war, he would have been sentenced to death.
On the other hand, ST did just as human being. What is his wrong?

Some people pointed out that you got too many lessons from CCP and as a result,
you always put the equality sign between CCP and china. I do not think so and
I believe they are actually giving you a very naive image. In my understanding,
your rule is just like what the CCP has: 'I am the only principle to judge
people's behavior. '

Please look at this, in 1986, CCP, who has been claimed to represent all
chinese people's interest, called on a 'stable and united' phase for
reform. You were against it and tried to demage all chinese's interest.
wwww(you told us your heoric history and never confess about it). Now you blame
any action which is regarded as a demage by the CCP. Even your blame is
much tougher than CCP: ST=WangJW!

I hope you can answer following questions:
1) What can you explaine your rebellious behavior in 1986 against CCP and
   therefore aginst all chinese people's interest (represented by CCP, in your
   logic)?
2) What change has been made since 1986 which makes you think that not obeying
   CCP is nothing but a triator to China.
3) What is difference between what you did in 1986 and what ST is doing now?
   Is that difference so big that you were once a hero and he is a traitor?

W. Deng, do not play such a stupid game please. No one will believe a person
like you will put all chinese people's interests in the first place (or even
tenth). Go ahead to do your own business and become an America. Chinese have
been suffered so long time just because they always have members like you.

Tell you a joke. People after die ususaly have to go through a registration in
Hell. First, they must be put in a boiler with full of hot oil for few minutes
then assigned a new job. One day, a new dead came. When he was brought to the
boiler, he laughed around. The secretaries were very surprised and reported
this to the King of the Hell. The King came to and asked where he had been as
he was alive. This dead said "Nanjing" (a famouse hot city). "Let him pass,
You studpid!", sad King to the secretaries.

Irrelevant? Let me tell you. I will not surprise any more no matter what you
could say because I come from China governed by CCP!

Dongning Mao
The University of Michigan
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: Bo Xiong <xiong@BSU-CS.BSU.EDU>
Subject:      Re: A reply to xpeng's attack
Reply-To: Bo Xiong <xiong@BSU-CS.BSU.EDU>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 04:58:07 GMT
Comments: To: china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu

Can't help comparing the following two messages, but still don't know
which hand(s) they raised ... (hint: raising right hands to grab greencard
and raising left hands to ... :-)

1) XIAOJIAN@CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU writes:
>
>	To clear my name and avoid further personal attack, I have to reveal
>some of my previous activities so you could judge whether I am qualified to
>call myself a demcracy-fighter:
>	In 1986 students movement, I was the first guy in the whole movement
>who stood up to call students to demonstate in the street. When: Dec.4,1986.
>Where: School hall of USTC (KeDa), Hefei. Audience: almost all KeDa people.
>I was also a major organizer of the first demonstation in the 86 movement
>which was held on Dec.5,1986 in Hefei, Anhui, and a major dialogue
>representative to have dialogue with officers held in the Anhui provincial
>headquarter at the same day.
>
>William Deng

2) Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 17:01:54 GMT
cshi@cs.ulowell.edu (Chunde Shi) wrote:
>
>A lot of Chinese students became "pro"-CCP after they came to the West,
>before that they were "anti"-CCP. I am one of them.

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

Forwarded to china-nt by Bo Xiong
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: "NY." <yue@MOHLSUN.PHYSICS.UPENN.EDU>
Subject:      Re: someone who sounds funny
Reply-To: "NY." <yue@MOHLSUN.PHYSICS.UPENN.EDU>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 18:12:40 GMT
Comments: To: CHINA-NT@uga.cc.uga.edu

It is funny(outrageous) to see someone's reaction to Mr. Shen's arrest.
When Mr. Shen did not go back to China, some people called him(and others)
chicken. When he did go back and is facing tough punishment of CCP, some people
denouced him as trying to get famous. What a logic it is! I cannot help feeling
sad for Mr. Shen ands cannot help saying that it is a shame for some people to
do those shameful things.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: lix@BUCRSB.BU.EDU
Subject:      Re: Shen Tong's arrest
Reply-To: lix@BUCRSB.BU.EDU
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 22:22:42 GMT
Comments: To: CHINA-NT@uga.cc.uga.edu

IFCSS Council Member Yuhe Liu wrote:
>On my
>opinions, Mr. Shen Tong has his rights to do what he wanted to do.

I am surprised by this understanding of rights from a GaoGan. No...
No one has rights to hurt others for his/her own desire, even he/she is
a GaoGan or GaoGan's kid.

OK, if ST wants to, and is well prepared to be "grabbed" by the CG,
it is OK, but he should not get his two friends involved -- unless they
would have the same protection as ST. Assuming these two friends were
honestly told the situation and are willing to sacrifice themselves,
we still don't know whether those poeple whom ST contacted for his
show (now all in CG's hands) were honestly told the situation and prepared
to go to jail.

No, ST does not have the right to cheat and betray others.

Let's call for releasing and non-investigating all people who were on
ST's video tape. ST is in fact much safer than those cheated and betrayed.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: "Ignatius Ding" <ding@HPSMTC1.CUP.HP.COM>
Subject:      Addresses and Phone Numbers
Reply-To: "Ignatius Ding" <ding@HPSMTC1.CUP.HP.COM>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 23:42:58 GMT
Comments: To: Dennis.D.Lee@Eng.Sun.COM, china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu,
              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@diva.berkeley.edu

Many individuals wish to cal or write to Chinese or American officials to voice
their concern regarding the arrest of Shen Tong in Beijing.  The following are
a few addresses and phone numbers for your reference:

      President George Bush
      The White House
      Washington, D.C. 20500
      Attn: Mr. Scott Sutherland
      Office of Public Liaison-125
      (202) 456-7140 (Phone) (202) 456-6218 (Fax)

      Mr. Lawrence Eagleburger
      Acting Secretary of State
      Department of State
      2201 C Street, N.W.
      Washington, D.C. 20520

      China Desk: (202) 647-6300 (Phone)
      Human Rights Affairs Bureau: (202) 647-2126 (Phone) (202) 647-7350 (Fax)

      The Honorable George Mitchell
      176 Russell Bldg.
      United States Senate
      Washington, D.C. 20510
      (202) 224-1430 (Phone)

      The Honorable Robert Dole
      141 Hart Bldg.
      United States Senate
      Washington, D.C. 20510
      (202) 224-3151 (Phone)

      The Honorable Tom Foley
      The Office of House Speaker
      1201 LHOB
      U.S. House of Representative
      Washington, D.C. 20515

      Embassy of People's Republic of China
      2300 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. 20009
      Washington, D.C.
      (202) 328-2500 (Phone) (202) 232-7856 (Fax)

      Consulate-General of People's Rep. of China
      1450 Laguna Street
      San Francisco, CA 94115
      (415) 563-4885 (Phone) (415) 563-0494 (Fax)

      Other Consulates/Embassy:

      New York		(212) 868-7752/330-7438
      Houston		(713) 524-8515
      Embassy (Ottawa)	(613) 234-2682
      Toronto		(416) 525-6288


Ignatius Ding
SVDC Communications
From: JUENKUNG@RAMOTH.USC.EDU
Subject:      Sample letter
Reply-To: JUENKUNG@RAMOTH.USC.EDU
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 20:16:00 GMT
Comments: To: ccnl%utarlvm1.uta.edu@USC.EDU, china-nt%uga.cc.uga.edu@USC.EDU

	Dear fellows:

	The writters of the sample letter have checked all the opinions
and suggestions recieved so far, and they feel those comments are very
constructive, even if they may not agree with some of them. They conclude
that it's not important whethen those opinions are correct or appropriate,
but it is important that so many people want to make the letter more
perfect. They ask me to express their DEEP thanks to those commenters.
	Together, we'll make a change! J.K.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: jzhang@SDCC3.UCSD.EDU
Subject:      Re: China's Interests
Reply-To: jzhang@SDCC3.UCSD.EDU
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 11:11:09 GMT
Comments: To: china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu

Even though I disagree with Shen Tong's support of Toycott
activities, I do want to see him released immediately.
Now about China and CCP...

In article <Btzp1D.Bqn@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> xpeng@ATHENA.MIT.EDU writes:
<>The definetion of China's interests: the accumulation of all Chinese'
<>interests.  W.Deng
<
<You forget that most of the interests are controlled by CCP and their children
<or addopted children though they are the products of ordinary Chinese efforts.
<
<>It is very strange that so many CSS enjoy bashing China while China ... -Deng-
<
<Bashing CCP is NOT equal to bashing China.  If you like to be confused it's
<fine.  It has been a consistant fomular for you.  So when you say you love
<China it means you love CCP to me.  So when you are talking about the China's
<interest it sounds like CCP's interest to me.  No wonder you will fight for
<it.

Sounds like it is YOU who are equating China with CCP.

<I had been trained for many years that China = CCP, Love CCP = Love China
<= Love Socialism and China's interests and CCP's interests are above
<everything (Of course including the Chinese people's lives since they are not
<the interests).
<
<Who is going to be blamed for the risk of losing MFN?  The victims of 6.4?
<Wang Jun-tao and other prisoners of conscience?  Shen Tong and other
<dissidents?  Why not.  They can not even argue with you.

Zhenqin Li
jzhang@sdcc3.ucsd.edu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: grad student Weihua Liu <whliu@EE.UMN.EDU>
Subject:      some thoughts on the China's new policy toward CSS
Reply-To: grad student Weihua Liu <whliu@EE.UMN.EDU>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 14:54:47 GMT
Comments: To: china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu

I read the original content of the People's Daily Overseas Edition.
My impression is that It is targeting the pending legislation in the
Congress to protect the CSS in the U.S. and trying to give President
Bush an excuse.  (who knows he will take it or not, but it is quite
sure this new policy may just be an idea from the Chinese government's
Washington D.C. lobbists).

Another impression is that the State Council of the PRC government is
under heavy pressure from Deng's reform-minded fraction and has to
carry out some "new" policy toward the overseas CSS accord to Deng's
"South" speech in the February.  The language of the new policy is
carefully organized and the timing is carefully calculated.  It started
with " the (chinese) government has always been helpful, concerned, and
educating the overseas CSS".

Do I need the "education" from the Chinese government? I don't.  So what
happens if I do not like what the government is teaching me.  Can I
speak out my believes.  O'yes, I will not be "investigated and proscuted for
what our CSS have done in the foreign country which has demaged the image
of China and harmful to China".  But speaking out believes is an
counterrevolutionary criminal in China and we can be punished for our
new "criminal".  By the way,  it is not our CSS demaging the image of China
but it is the shameful Chinese government demaging their own image overseas
and demaging the Chinese people's image.

From the many repeated "loose-tight" cycles of overseas CSS policy for
the last serveral years, I do not believe the goodwill of this new policy
at all.   It is just a product of our lobby work in the U.S. and a
product of the internal power struggle inside the CCP.   If you want to
change your passport,  take the chance now, the new policy may be changed
overnight due to unforseeable reasons.

Unless this is a real change, and there are a new constitution, a new
government, and ture democracy in China.  There will be no real freedom for
the Chinese people, including the CSS overseas as long as you hold a Chj
Chinese passport.

Our hope is not laying on Chinese government's "goodwill".  Our hope
is laying on our own struggle, our lobby in the U.S.   There is no
such a goodwill from the "our government" if we do not lobby the 
US Congress heavily.  Continue the lobyy in the coming weeks and fight
for our freedom decisively!
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: xlli@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (xiao-lin li)
Subject: Re: Shen Tong's Arrest Confirmed
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 16:45:33 GMT

In article <1992Sep2.232353.25582@ulowell.ulowell.edu> cshi@cs.ulowell.edu (Chunde Shi) writes:

>More evidence for my argument:
>    6. Today's New York Times(sept 2nd), had an claimed Shen Tong article,
>titled "The Next Revolution". I have question about the it:
>      a. It claimed to be written by Shend Tong and "handed to a friend
>several hours before his arrest", His arrest was the day before yesterday 1pm(
>East Time of U.S.). His coordinate in Newton got the info. Why took so long(
>around 36 hours until last night) to
>reach press when we consider a fax could do it right away? Was that a work of
>Ross Terill, an white Anglo Sexon, the kind tend to be british eximperilism
>apologists and defame ex-victims to distract public attension away from the
>crimes committed by british before;
>      b. Why is it written in English? the article's aim was to call upon 
>Chinese in China?

I think it is a speculation that Ross Terill wrote the article. The article
was addressed in Shen Tong's name. Offcially, it is Shen Tong's article. He
is responsible for whatever influence the article may have. I don't think
Ross Terill would be willing to serve as a secretary of a 24 year old
Shen Tong.

>      c. The English is beyound a non-native english speaking's ablility.
>      d. It used words like "Old man", "Far more than the world realizes,
>corruption, strikes, dissent, HUNGER, violence and unbalanced development are
>forming storm clounds over China", "(call others to build) civil society"
>(for China). Those are standard words used by Westeners, e.g. they call them
>selves as "civilized world" when talking about China.
>I do not think he did it for himself, I think he was sincere on his beliefe. 
>I think he is a victim of West(UK, US)'s "Pyschological Warfare" and was
>insulated from reality by people around him(Strauss, Terill etc).

May be it is a good translation. I have seen how a Chinese article can be
translated into English in a beautiful way, the way that is comprehenssible
to people in West.

Nothing surprise me.

Let me give you my explanation on this. Shen Tong's article was written
in Chinese. Before his arrest, he asked his friends to send this article
to US. It took about 36 hours for Ross Terill (or whoever) to translate
it into English. The hours of delay may reflect the care taken so that
Shen Tong's article would not be distorted when translated into English.
This is my speculation, no proof.

Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: xlli@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (xiao-lin li)
Subject: Re: China's Interests
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 17:28:08 GMT

In article <BtzMK2.KtJ@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> XIAOJIAN@CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU writes:
>
>The action by ST may give the already jerpodized China's MFN a fatal final
>blow. The lost of MFN will hurt millions of general Chinese' interests,
>let alone the ongoing progress to a freeer merket and eventually a
>modern democratic country.

You never know what is the best interests of China. I think both
you and ST have good will toward China, but from different angle.
The problem of China is the arrogance of the government leaders.
It may save MFN this time, but have more disasture next time. So
it really depends on how do you view things.

>It is very strange that so many CSS enjoy bashing China while China is
>struggling for a modern country and making impressive progress in most
>aspects of social life, and praising the freedom and democracy in former
>Soviet and Eastern Europe while people there are suffering poverty of
>or civil war. Roma cannot be built overnight, neither freedom and
>democracy. And the approach used by ST will just get the opposite.

Not true. We are defensive to China. Sometimes you have to admit
that China indeed has problems. If we don't say it, we are dishonest.

>A fact: in modern history, no a developing country with democracy can
>manage to develop to a developed country. There does exist trade off
>between economic development and democracy to a developing country.

I disagree. I think a country can develop both and it needs to
develop both.

>A netter mentioned Tan,Shitong. ST fled just after 6.4 and went by
>with full support of untle Sam exactly when Chinese officers openly
>ask for a better Sino-US relationship, just the opposite to Tan, Shitong.
>What a "hero"! :-)

Your language is abusive here, may I point out?

>William Deng


Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: ldong@hila.hut.fi (Liyun Dong)
Subject: Re:      IFCSS Statement on Shen Tong's Arrest
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 06:41:18 GMT

>
>                  IFCSS Statement on Shen Tong's Arrest
>
>        We were astonished to learn that Shen Tong, a Chinese student at
                 ^^^^^^^^^^
really?
	
>Boston Universtity, was arrested in Beijing yesterday during his home visit
>to China. IFCSS expresses deep concern over the incident.
>
>        Recently, the Chinese government has repeatedly pledged the safety
>of overseas Chinese students, including those who have participated in
>"anti-government" activities. Shen Tong's arrest once again cast serious
>doubts on these pledges. As an organization whose mission is to safe guard

Shen was not arrested until he was found to organize an activity which
probably violated current communist law of forbitting anti-government
activities.
So his arrest seems not conflict with CCP's pledges for returning of CSS.

>the interests of Chinese students and scholars in the United States, IFCSS
>strongly demands
>
>        1. That Shen Tong be released immediately and unconditionally and
>allowed to return to the United States to continue his education;
>
this may be the best solution.

>        2. That pratical measures be adopted to ensure free entry and exit
>by home-visiting students and guarantee their personal safety;
>
i don't see any danger for ordinary CSS visiting home.

>        3. That all violations of legitimate rights of overseas students be
>terminated.
>
what are legitimate rights? by definition of US laws or Chinese laws?

>        We hope that the Chinese government will act swiftly and wisely on
>this matter.

agree.

Huachen Pan
Finland
-------------
i use friend's account







Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: zhuh@athena.mit.edu (Hui Zhu)
Subject: Re: response to Mr. W. Dong and Mr. T. Bao's comments
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 15:44:37 GMT

In article <1992Sep3.135614.10996@cs.brown.edu>, ylq@lems23lems.brown.edu (Yan Shen) writes:
|> In article <2SEP199218172852@phobos.ucc.umass.edu>, s9874194@phobos.ucc.umass.edu (s9874194) writes:
|> |> I just have some comments on your understanding of Constitution. Have you
|> |> approved the Constitution of the United States? Do you have the obligation
|> |> to obey it? If someone want to change it, what s/he should do?
|> 		^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|> |> 
|> 
|> CCP always does that. During the Culture revolution, Lin Biao was in the 
|> constitution as heir of Chairman Mao's revolutionary mission. After Deng came 
|> to power, he put four "insist"s into the constitution. What else ? Don't you 
|> think it is kind of joke that only the top leaders can manipulate 
|> the constitution of 1.2 billion people. 


Wrong. Lin Biao was never in the Constitution as heir of Chairman Mao, though he was
put in TangZhang(constitution of CCP). 

|> The Constitution of United State has been out there for more than 200 years.
|> Since 1949, you know how many times the Constitution of China has been abolished 
|> by the same party and then rewritten by the same group of people with different 
|> bosses. 

Wrong. The Consitution of United States has been modified by adding so-called 
"Amendments".  

What's the hell reasons should we keep the same Constitution for more than 200 years?
or even more?  You want the Constitutions of Qing dynasty or Mingguo? They are
really old though. :) :)

Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: ylq@lems23lems.brown.edu (Yan Shen)
Subject: Re: response to Mr. W. Dong and Mr. T. Bao's comments
Organization: Laboratory for Engineering Man/Machine Systems
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 17:18:37 GMT

In article <1992Sep3.154437.29086@athena.mit.edu>, zhuh@athena.mit.edu (Hui Zhu) writes:
|> 
|> |> The Constitution of United State has been out there for more than 200 years.
|> |> Since 1949, you know how many times the Constitution of China has been abolished 
|> |> by the same party and then rewritten by the same group of people with different 
|> |> bosses. 
|> 
|> Wrong. The Consitution of United States has been modified by adding so-called 
|> "Amendments".  
|> 

But no politican can change that first amendment and nobody can add any other 
amendments onto it only by him/herself. 

|> What's the hell reasons should we keep the same Constitution for more than 200 years?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|> or even more?  You want the Constitutions of Qing dynasty or Mingguo? They are
|> really old though. :) :)
|> 

It prevents any politican from thinking that he is above the constitution and the 
law. Is this the fundamental difference ?
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china