HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: zhuh@athena.mit.edu (Hui Zhu)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: WHAT REAL TIBETANS THINK?
Date: 5 Sep 92 20:09:31 GMT
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology

In article <0001@tia.lhasa.tb>, Real_Tibetans@tia.lhasa.tb writes:
|>  
|> Tibetans want independence!  China out!
|>  
|>  
|> A committee of real Tibetans.


Hi, you, faked-tibetan, listen:

whoever you are, whatever your name is. I don't care. :)

But by posting from a faked "Real_Tibetans@tia.lhasa.tb" won't qualify you
as a real Tibetan, and what you said is therefore NONSENSE.  :)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan
From: claudius@leland.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu)
Subject: Re: Who Cares 150 F-16s.
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 16:01:27 GMT

In article <1992Sep10.135254.18112@bnr.ca> xyang@bnr.ca writes:

>I don't think Chinese government is worried about the capacity of
>those F-16s, rather the sale is a signal that U.S. government wants
>to cause trouble between the Strait, which worried the Chinese
>government a bit as what China needed most now is a stable
>political environment to re-build CCP's strength and China's
>economy.

Huh?  Please explain why the sale would destablize the relationship between
Mainland and Taiwan.  It is not like that the sale gives Taiwan the capacity
to invade or harass the southeastern Chinese coast, you know...

If anything, it should *promote* stability by boostering the Taiwanese
defense, thus decreasing (albeit *very* slightly) the chance of a communist
invasion.

>Are you kidding? How come US cares about Taiwan's security? Is US
>Taiwan's mother/protector or what? What US
>really cares is divide and weaken China, which, BTW, is reasonable 
>strategy for any government at this position, so that China will not
>become a potential threat (politically and economically) in
>a near future. Taiwan is merely a card in US's hand to play
>with Chinese government in mainland. The sale is more a political
>signal/move than anything else.

It's a political move all right, but it has *nothing* to do with "dividing"
and "weakening" China.  Bush wants to save his skin; he wants to be
re-elected.  He wants to show the voters in Texas that he's willing to save
their jobs.
From: v999qx29@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: 150 F-16 to Taiwan
Date: 5 Sep 92 18:40:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <65500087@acf3.NYU.EDU>, yangze@acf3.NYU.EDU (Ze Yang, , , ) writes...
> 
>TIers are rebels, they betraied their motherland just for fried 
>chicken legs, all the Chinese should defend our motherland's integrity, 
>because that will benefit all the Chinese in a long run, as long
>as there is such a thing called country, we should protect our country's
>property, seperatist should be tried, rebels should be prosecuted.
> 
>Ze Yang
Ideology dosen't relly solve a problem. The motive of TI is not as simple
as what you said. Your calling TI rebels reminds me of KMT's calling
CCP bandits. Stopping US selling F-16 to Taiwan is not the way to promote
unification. Improving the democrocy and economy in mainland is the only 
way to make unification possible. No body has the right to claim his group
the only legal government of a country unless they are elected by the people.
Those fierce threat only frighten people to keep away from you. If you feel
TI is an unacceptable lose to you then win it back by making Mainland at least
as good as USA. Don't you see people all over the world coming to the US?
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: bbs@medsys.rn.com (Public BBS System)
Subject: Re: period   (about "democracy")
Reply-To: bbs@medsys.UUCP (Public BBS System)
Organization: Med-Systems, Kingsport, Tennessee
Date: 06 Sep 1992 12:15:19 GMT

In article <2AA803C0.13003@news.service.uci.edu> yeh@netix.com (Mr Shannon Yeh) writes:
>
>Today,
>
>	          \					    -------
>	       --------					    |-----|
>  CCP is         --|--		the Chinese people are 	    |--|--
>	       ____|_____ , 				    |/  \|   
>

More like Zhu Shao Yi Dian.

Chou1

Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan
From: ykhsu@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (yung-kao.hsu)
Subject: Re: Who Cares 150 F-16s.
Organization: AT&T
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 21:26:47 GMT

In article <1992Sep11.174825.20736@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> jqtan@northstar60 (Jian-Qi Tan) writes:
>Taiwanese government's feeling of insecurity is a result of its own ambition
>to rule the whole China someday.  Especially these days, many foreign powers
>are keen on promoting "human rights and democracy" in China.  Taiwan couldn't
>wait for the day when the central government collapse and it becomes the
>biggest warlord in China, with many F-16s and Mirages.

	I do believe there are few KMT old timers who hold such dream
	(they are no different from the old guards in mainland). The
	problem they has is that they can not win political supports
	in Taiwan and they are dying fast. I don't think anyone will
	take them seriously. So, I don't think this is a valid assessment
	at all.

Yung-Kao Hsu

Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan
From: yang-allan@CS.YALE.EDU (J. Allan Yang)
Subject: Re: Who Cares 150 F-16s.
Organization: Dept of CS, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06520-2158
	<10SEP199216172457@deimos.ucc.umass.edu>
	<1992Sep10.233032.11008@cs.yale.edu>
	<1992Sep11.140232.23653@tamsun.tamu.edu>
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 12:48:43 GMT

 > From: x0y3510@tamuts.tamu.edu (Xuejun Yang)
 > Sender: news@tamsun.tamu.edu (Read News)
 > References: <1992Sep10.154925.1543@nntpd.lkg.dec.com> <10SEP199216172457@deimos.ucc.umass.edu> <1992Sep10.233032.11008@cs.yale.edu>
 > Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 14:02:32 GMT
 > ...
 > [my posting deleted]
 > ...
 > Allan:
 > As a quiet reader, I have been totally disgusted by your repeated
 > accusations of mainlanders chauvinisms. Look in the mirror at you
 > yourself. To me, you are simply a pitiful, selfish, obnoxous snob.
 > You think you its right to look down at poorer people. By the way,
 > I think people in Taiwan are not yet wealthy by any standards:
 > They only appear to be rich in mainland. They pay too much for daily
 > necessities in Taiwan. They don't yet have all the nice public works
 > like Libraries, Clean air and other infrastructures. The industry
 > is merely copies from US or Japan when they dumped. That's why the
 > Taiwan government is in a six-year infrastructure campaign. Taiwan
 > is totally at mercy of big countries like US. It is merely a card to
 > play by the US. Now do you feel better?
 > Regards!

You misunderstood me badly. I am for the stay of Chinese students in
the States wholeheartedly. My posting has a big IF right at the
beginning and if the premise fails, the consequence is of course
vacuous. I use this extremely sensitive analogy hoping to make you,
the generation of well-educated Chinese who know what democratic
societies are like, understand how Taiwanese feel on a possible
forced unification and therefore why we hate to see any force to
disrupt Taiwan's purchase of defensive fighters (or, execuse me for
another sensitive analogy, force to disrupt the legal pursuit of
Chinese students to stay abroad).

No, I dare not look down on poorer people in mainland who has the
great potential to become a dominant power in the world. Besides, I
think they are same kind of people as we are and I deeply wish
mainland can really develop well. My whole point is to criticize the
insensitive dismissal of the right of Taiwanese to protect
themselves that is subtly shown in the posting I followed.

Your criticisms on Taiwan is completely right. Taiwan is no where
close to the most advanced countries yet. We hope we can get there.
And we hope we did not have to spend the $6.6 billions for the
F-16's and Mirage's and can use that money to clean up our air and
build more roads. Just think about what a sad reality it is that
almost all Taiwanese are happy to see $6.6 billion spent on buying
fighters and not on domestic improvements? Why?

- Allan
From: bl220006@wvnvms.wvnet.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Investment in China : Info Wanted
Date: 15 Sep 92 15:50:36 GMT
Organization: West Virginia Network for Educational Telecomputing

Hello folks!

I am a faculty member at Bluefield State College, Bluefield, WV. We have a 
committee that is trying to glabalize the local economy of the area.

	We are trying to get the local business people interested in investing
in China and some other foreign countries. We are currently focussing on China.
We are conducting a forum and an informational seminar for the local business
people to provide them with the investment and business opportunities in China.

	I have been to China myself this past summer and met with a lot of
government and higher authority officials who seemed to be very interested in
the project. I would like to seek help from all the Chinese and Oriental friends
on the net to provide me some information on the following topics :

	1) What are the cities and provinces where there is a lot of industrial
	   growth taking place ?
	2) What are the leading industrialized areas ?
	3) What are the import and export restrictions and regulations?
	4) What are the agencies from where we can get some more information
	   on these matters ?
	5) What are the businesses which have a good potential and in what 
	   geographical areas ?
	6) What are the possibilities of a bilateral trade between these 
	   area and U.S ?
	7) What products have a very good demand in the Chinese markets ?

	I will appreciate any information on these topics and will be 
glad to talk to you personally if you are interested in being a part of this 
project. 

	Thanks for the help.

- Indy.
Xref: sparky soc.culture.china:25134 soc.culture.taiwan:13045 soc.culture.hongkong:10609
From: lix@yangtze.bu.edu (Xiaowen Li)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan,soc.culture.hongkong
Subject: Re: Territory of Ancient China : Tang Dynasty
Date: 9 Sep 92 14:45:45 GMT
Followup-To: soc.culture.china
Organization: Boston University

In article <92Sep9.100531edt.128@orasis.vis.toronto.edu> liuyh@vis.toronto.edu (Yuanhui Liu) writes:
>In article <1992Sep9.022715.24826@leland.Stanford.EDU> claudius@leland.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu) writes:
<>In article <95545@bu.edu> lix@xanadu.bu.edu (Xiaowen Li) writes:
<(deleted)
<>
<>Unfortunately (he did have good intentions, but...) the abolishment of Rou
<>Xin caused more deaths, according to what I read, since the punishment was
<>then changed to whipping, which often resulted in deaths.

Mr. Lu is right, but what I said is his awareness of human rights presented
in his order. 
<>
<Liu Hen was a good emperor, but Han Dynasty's military was in a sad
<shape, china was still exhausted, Xiong Nu plunders the north at will,
<it was similar to the situation Li Shi Ming faced, but the Tang Dynasty
<managed to change from fending off the Tu Jue from 20 miles of its
<capital to wipe them out a couple of years later, with an exhausted
<country also.  You have to say that militarily Liu Hen or his son(Jin Di)
<was no comparison to Li Shi Ming, only until Liu Che(Wu Di) Han started
<to acquire the capibility of defending itself.  

Nah, Liu Che did too much more than defending. He even started war at his
free will, and finally spent over all national reserves accumulated since
Liu Hen. This is also exactly the pattern of QianLong to KangXi.

<>>Similarly, KangXi is another surprise in Chinese history. No other
<>>emperors ever understood and taught his offsprings:
<>>
<>>Emperor is to manage the country,
<>>not the country to serve the emperor.
<
<Li Shi Ming was the first to speak the truth about the relation
<between the Emperor and his subjects:  Water can carry the ship,
<but it also can overturn the ship.  

This is exactly why KangXi is superior to TaiZong: In TaiZong's mind,
people can be used, but may also present as a danger, if the emperor
did not take care of them well enough. This is good, better than other
emperors. However, the master-servant relation was reversed only in
KangXi's couplets.
<>
<>Hmmm.  I am not sure the Liu Hen had any understanding of democracy, and
<>although he was an excellent emperior (IMO), he once almost executed the
<>entire family (the 3 Zu's) of a man accused of cutting a tree on the tomb of
<>his father, Liu Bon (Han Gou Zu).  Of course, everyone had their blemishes.

In any dynasty, cutting tree on emperors's tomb would be similarly punished:-(
This was very severe crime at that time.

<>Another emperor who ranks high on my list is Liu Shiu (Han Guang Wu Di).  His
<>personality showed a lot of kindness and non-forgetfulness of the good things

Yeah, I think GuangWu should be ranked about the same level of TaiZong, the
first rate emperors, while Han Wen and KangXi are super-rate.

-- 
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: ping@bnlux1.bnl.gov (Shiping Zhang)
Subject: Re: Protection Bill
Organization: Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY 11973
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 18:44:30 GMT

In article <2SEP199210453163@phobos.ucc.umass.edu> s9874194@phobos.ucc.umass.edu (s9874194) writes:
>
>Here is some thought about the protection bill:
>
>Suppose it is passed and signed by the president. Suppose you get the
>green card. As several netter pointed out earlier, you believe that CCP
>will treat you better and you believe that you could easily come back to 
>the US in case of any trouble. So yuo go back to China to promote the
>reform and democracy there. One day, there is some people on the street
>protest/demonstrate or doing whatever you like. And then you are going 
>to joint them. Also you want your friends, collegues and your students
>to go with you. Suppose that I am one of them and I am a normal student
>never get a chance come to the US and get a green card, What would be 
>in my mind if you ask me to fight for freedom and democracy? Yeh, you
>have the freedom to go back the United States when you get into trouble.
>(even this may not be absolutely true) How about me? I guess the only 
>freedom I would have is to go to the jail.

  Then stay at home.  No one should force you to join the protest.
  Here the issue is whether you are a real D-fighter or just an
  opportunitist.  Democracy fighter in China is certainly not just
  a beautiful name. Those who are afraid to go to jail in China
  should keep a distance from it.  And I think those who are already
  on the street for protest probably won't quit because someone with
  an US PR has joined in.
 
>I think the first impact the protection bill will have to China is
>effectivelly isolate the Chinese students here from the mass majoriity
>people back home.

  So the CCP government should be glad to see the bill passed if it
  also thought your way.

>                  BTW, a lot of CCP's benificiary policy towards
>returning CSS has the same effect too.

  That's probably what CCP exactly wants. :-)

>So, for those of you who believe that the Protection Bill will really
>help the democracy in China, think that twice.

  Twice is enough?  How many times should those think who don't believe
  the bill would help the democracy in China?  Once, or none?

>c.q.

-ping
From: yangze@acf3.nyu.edu (Ze Yang)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: F-16's fear?
Date: 9 Sep 92 22:37:13 GMT
Organization: New York University

cyc@z.eecs.umich.edu (Yi-Chieh Chang) writes:

>In article <65500110@acf3.NYU.EDU> yangze@acf3.NYU.EDU (Ze Yang, , , ) writes:
>>cyc@z.eecs.umich.edu (Yi-Chieh Chang) writes:
>>
>>>Even so, they only recognized what ROC has lost to PRC, such as mainland
>>>China, not what ROC still owned. It's true that PRC is now recognized as
>>
>>Only a small pecentage of people think there is such a thing called
>>ROC, all others think of GMD as a rebel group, but they have control
>>over Taiwan, just like Philipine Communist gurrillas have controls
>>over part of that country.
>>
>>>Yi-Chieh
>>
>>Ze Yang

>But, if there are more than 130 countries doing business with the group
>of people you called 'rebel', isn't this a strange world ?
>In a strange world, you better be careful, don't get your ass kicked by 
>strange people.

Even more countries do bussiness with drug planter in the tri-country
area (near souther China), I don't think it's strange, do you think 
it's strange?

>Yi-Chieh

Ze Yang
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: bbs@medsys.rn.com (Public BBS System)
Subject: Re: 150 F-16 to Taiwan
Reply-To: bbs@medsys.UUCP (Public BBS System)
Organization: Med-Systems, Kingsport, Tennessee
Date: 06 Sep 1992 12:23:22 GMT

In article <laggheINNr2v@nada.cs.utexas.edu> s245@cs.utexas.edu (Spring Class Account) writes:
>
>China will cancel its $6b airplane order with the US.
>
Seems Bush needs to do a simple calculation to figure out the net profit.

>Also, it is very likely that China will risk its entire trade relationship
>with the US.  
>
China exports more to the U.S. than it imports from the U.S. It would
not be wise to cut the trade. Getting emotional doesn't help.

Chou1
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan
From: yewang@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Yenwen Wang)
Subject: Re: Insensitive mainland chauvinist view. (Was: Who Cares 150 F-16s.)
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 00:59:55 GMT

In article <13SEP199211140907@phobos.ucc.umass.edu> s9874194@phobos.ucc.umass.edu (s9874194) writes:

>
>I have been posting since the second day after Bush's announcement.
>I have been keep saying that selling weapons to Taiwan is a violation
>to PRC's sovereignty, just like selling weapons to IRA (Irish Republican
>Army). It is not an issue between Beijing and Taipei. It is an issue
>between Beijing and Washington. 
>
Comparing IRA with ROC is not only wrong, but insulting! This again
shows the insensitivity of the Chinese people and the education
by CCP are so deep-rooted.

ROC was once a government of the entire China, then lost
the civil war, and then lost the recognitions from other
countries. IRA started as a minority group asking for
independence, then resorted to terrorism. People in
Taiwan see their country humiliated year after year, few
mainland Chinese understand that. They only think the whole
thing as a zero-sum game between CCP and KMT.

Yes, insisting PRC's sovereignty may satisfy your nationalistic
appetite, but from Taiwan's viewpoint, it's chauvinistic. You
do not get anything constructive done.


>
>BTW, to my knowledge, F-16 is not a defensive weapon. It can cross
>the straight within a minute. It will be used as a counter threat,
>not as a defence.
>
>c.q.
Counter threat is not a means of defense? You mean Taiwan should build
a 'Maginot line'-- a sitting duck type of defense, I suppose :-)


Yenwen wang

-- 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
  Yenwen Wang                        wangy@kaa.eng.ohio-state.edu
  The Ohio State University          yewang@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: x0y3510@tamuts.tamu.edu (Xuejun Yang)
Subject: Re: Chinese culture
Organization: ~/lib/organization
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 22:31:19 GMT

In article <79610@ut-emx.uucp> joe@astro.as.utexas.edu (Joe Wang) writes:
>In article <1992Sep11.222444.9195@news.acns.nwu.edu> usenet@news.acns.nwu.edu (Usenet on news.acns) writes:
>>Don't blame people for not traditional. If we  
>>keep traditional, our country will stay where she is now forever without  
>>progress.
>
>With a 8% per year GDP growth, China is definitely changing.  Some of
>those changes (more money) are good.  Some of those changes (more
>corruption) are bad.  On the whole, I'd say that there are more good
>changes than bad ones.
>
>>Why? that land is too old and dry like our old  
>>culture. No matter how hard you dig, there is little the culture can offer 
>>in this modern era.  
>
>Chinese culture offers two things.  First of all, it offers about 5000
>years of experience into how people behave.  Chinese culture can be
>thought of partly as a huge living database of information, and with
>this database you can avoid making the same mistakes as earlier
>people.  Second, Chinese culture offers a point of stability in what
>is an unstable world.  
>
>>Yes, the old Chinese culture is our ancester's culture. 
>>But why should we stick to it? 
>>Why not search somewhere else for something new. (as in the film, move  
>>down hill where there is plenty of water). Why?
>
>Where do you suggest looking?  The West has a lot of problems of its
>own.
>
>
>
>
I agree with what Joe said. As a mainlander, I looked down upon Chinese
culture before and right after I came to the States, but now I have got
a view similar to yours. You see, the grass is always greener on the
other side. I think a lot of my friends from mainland have similar
experience. So look closer at both cultures and you will be surprised
to have changed your views. People like Carl keeps finding faults with
China may be living in a fantacy world or with one eye blind. Anyway,
get real, be realistic and objective. Don't apply rich people's 
way of thinking on poor people, that's so-called Chinese reality but
I doubt if poor is equal to bad culture.      


Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan,soc.culture.hongkong
From: wlin@byron.u.washington.edu (Wei Lin ~{AVgb~})
Subject: [Info] Table of Contents, HXWZ #76
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 07:54:31 GMT

Dear Netters,

	HXWZ is a weekly electronic magazine in the Chinese language
published by China News Digest (CND).

>From      Executive Editor:  Wang, Huang-Xin < cnd-cm@sdsc.edu >

                           Hua Xia Wen Zhai
                        (CND Chinese Magazine)
                              Issue #76
                          September 11, 1992

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Table of Contents (cm9209b)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. News: China to Have Foreign Co-Sponsored Newspaper
2. Controversy: A Bottle Filled with "China China China"....Long Yingtai
3. Essay: Note on Love.............................................Si Yu 
4. Novelty: Chinese Language for Therapy........................Le Deqin
5. Mid-Autumn: Random Thought under the Moon...................Xiao Ming
               Song of Parasol.............(South Song Dynasty) Cai Shen
               Tourist Spots in China Named with "Moon"
6. Humor: Chinese Ancient Jokes
7. Satire: Again on "Like Article, Like the Person"...............Ah Gui
8. Recipe: Chicken Cold Noodle
9. "We" (Wo Men): An Issue of Racism.............................Cai Jin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    A print-ready version of the current issue (in PostScript) is
    available in gb/cnd-cm subdirectory at ahkcus.org via anonymous
    ftp. See HXWZ_PS.hlp in the same directory for instructions.
    Please avoid printing HXWZ in peak hours on a multi-user printer.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe to CND Chinese Magazine:
Send a mail to  LISTSERV@UGA.BITNET    with no subject line.
The mail body should contain only one line

sub CCMAN-L      full name

where the "full name" is your full name.
------------------------------------------------------------
To quit from CND Chinese Magazine:
Send a mail to  LISTSERV@UGA.BITNET    with no subject line.
The mail body should contain only one line

unsub CCMAN-L 
-----------------------------------------------------------
The machine will handle your request automatically, and you
will be notified about the processing of your request.
-----------------------------------------------------------
For detailed information/help, please E-mail to:
             LISTSERV@UGA.BITNET
The mail body should contain only one line:
             GET CMHELP INDEX
-----------------------------------------------------------
The BITNET node name UGA.BITNET is equivalent to internet
	uga.uga.edu
-----------------------------------------------------------
The current issue in Hz format can be found in newsgroup
alt.chinese.text
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan