HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ldong@hila.hut.fi (Liyun Dong)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
Subject: Re: Conference, Sino-Tibetan Relations: Prospects for the future
Date: 4 Oct 92 05:29:00 GMT
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland

In article <BvEp0A.MK7@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca> richter@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (C. Richter) writes:
>spent, but like it or not, self-determination is the trend, has been 
>the trend, and will be the trend for the future.  Empires have been breaking
>up, colonies have been freeing themselves and are running their own 
>affairs as independent countries.  China will eventually lose its 
>colonies also.
>
>-- 
>Conrad Richter                     richter@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca
>Richters Herbs                     71550.3411@compuserve.com
>Goodwood, ON L0C 1AO Canada        Tel 416-640-6677 / Fax 416-640-6641


According to your trend, Anglo-Saxons should go back to Europe and return
N. America and Australia to aboriginals. We know that it is not realistic
and it means some of the 'trend' will not be true.
You may argue that Canaca, USA had finally got independent from U.K. to 
prove your theory. But it is not an ethernical issue.
History is not made by fairness, rather by power and force. Maybe someday
Tibet would get independence, but most probably after China collapsed
economically and politically like russia. So be patient.

H.Pan
------------
pan@hermes.hut.fi
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: engp2030@nusunix1.nus.sg (WU HU)
Subject: Looking for Ma Xuewu
Organization: National University of Singapore
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 01:54:09 GMT

Ma Xuewu, friend of mine, graduated from Tianjin University.
He went to N Ill U in 1989.

Wu Hu
engp2030@nusvm.bitnet    or
engp2030@nusunix1.nus.sg
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: heping@plasma.gatech.edu (Heping He)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
Subject: Re: $.0.48/min. to China?
Date: 28 Sep 92 21:29:14 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

In article <BvB32p.CzM@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> UFDZ@UFPINE.BITNET writes:
|After I posted "where may IFCSS get self support money?", several netters asked
|the China calls. As I know AT&T, MCT and .... provide a reach world program $.49
|to Taiwan and Hongkong, if IFCSS works out China on the list too that benifit IF
|CSS. Dawei

Are you speaking on virtual reality?
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: "(NY.)" <yue@MOHLSUN.PHYSICS.UPENN.EDU>
Subject:      veto
Reply-To: "(NY.)" <yue@MOHLSUN.PHYSICS.UPENN.EDU>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 04:38:19 GMT
Comments: To: CHINA-NT@uga.cc.uga.edu

Actually , the veto reported in cnn headline news is to another bill-
conditional MFN to China.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: roger@chopin.udel.edu (Chuan Peng)
Subject: Reflections on Lobbying, etc.
Organization: University of Delaware
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 04:17:16 GMT



Reflections On Lobbying, etc.


I am expressing some personal, and only personal thoughts.

1. I am not a student organizer. I am not a politician. I am not a lobby
expert. I am not a full-time computer news reader. I am a Chinese student,
though.

2. Since I have been generally following the Protection Bill lobbying
postings, I decided to make public some personal thoughts on this matter.

3. It bothers me to see people (mostly Chinese) getting nasty back and
forth on this newsgroup. People divide themselves into alphabetical groups
and initiate demeaning arguments against each other. Although I came to
the U.S. before April 1990, I would like to think myself as a Chinese, not
a certain group of Chinese.

4. I agree the April 1990 date is arbitrary and ridiculous. But not
everything is clear-cut and black and white. Bills, acts, and laws are
just imperfect, and sometimes unfair, like human beings. Imagine two close
friends separated by this date: how would they think and feel? What is
important is preserving such a friendship. In a broader case, preserving
the unity of the Chinese community.

5. It is natural for the late-comers to express their frustration. It is
not natural for them to become hostile toward the early-comers.
Early-comers did not make the rules. Their purpose of lobbying is not to
make things worse for the late-comers, although there is possibility for
the late-comers to view things that way. However, if you decide to lobby
to oppose the bill, it is more likely that your purpose IS to make things
worse for those covered by the bill because it is hard to understand that
you would gain anything by opposing the bill.

6. I hope we all do not degrade ourselves by antagonizing each other. Let
us respect each other. Let us not wish others become worse off. Let us be
friends. Let us think things over from others' view points and try and
make benevolent decisions.
From: JUENKUNG@RAMOTH.USC.EDU
Subject:      Interview between LA Times and LA CSS
Reply-To: JUENKUNG@RAMOTH.USC.EDU
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 09:01:00 GMT
Comments: cc: zhao@huxtal.bitnet

From:	IN%"sma%PHYSICS.UCLA.EDU@USC.EDU"  "MA, SIFENG"  1-OCT-1992 19:14:39.83
To:	IN%"CCNL%UTARLVM1.BITNET@VM.USC.EDU"  "Multiple recipients of list CCNL"
CC:
Subj:	Interview by LA Times reporter

Return-path: <@VM.USC.EDU:CCNL@UTARLVM1.BITNET>
Received: from VM.USC.EDU by ramoth.usc.edu (PMDF #12519) id
 <01GPG0TISRPCAC5GG5@ramoth.usc.edu>; Thu, 1 Oct 1992 18:54 PST
Received: from VM.USC.EDU by VM.USC.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 9007;
 Thu, 01 Oct 92 18:53:24 PDT
Received: from USCVM.BITNET by VM.USC.EDU (Mailer R2.08) with BSMTP id 6428;
 Thu, 01 Oct 92 18:53:22 PDT
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 18:28:00 PDT
From: "MA, SIFENG" <sma%PHYSICS.UCLA.EDU@usc.edu>
Subject: Interview by LA Times reporter
To: Multiple recipients of list CCNL <CCNL%UTARLVM1.BITNET@VM.USC.EDU>
Reply-to: "MA, SIFENG" <sma%PHYSICS.UCLA.EDU@usc.edu>
Message-id: <01GPG0TISRPCAC5GG5@ramoth.usc.edu>
Comments: To: ccnl <ccnl@utarlvm1.uta.edu>

Folks,

The interview by LA Times held at UCLA earlier this afternoon was
very successful. About 20 from UCLA, USC and Caltech attended it.
Whithin the two hours of interview, we were able to make the issues
very clear: Promote human rights in China; Exert pressure on Chinese
government; Release Shen Tong and others immediately; We deserve
freedom. Many used their own or friends' stories and experience
to get the points across. An editorial is under way.

We feel it is very important to learn how to use the media and to keep
a close relationship with it. Although we'll have to wait to see what
actually appears, none of us feels it'll hurt.

We'd like to take this opportunity to thank those from USC and Caltech
who attended the interview. It wasn't easy for them to drive twenty
miles to UCLA, because the traffic in LA is incredibly terrible!

UCLA Lobby Task Force
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: phsj@marlin.jcu.edu.au (su jianfeng)
Subject: Re: Conference, Sino-Tibetan Relations: Prospects for the future
Organization: James Cook University
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 92 08:02:40 GMT

In article <15844@umd5.umd.edu> mpound@astro.umd.edu (Marc Pound) writes:
>In article <liqiang.717961798@kramden> liqiang@kramden.nyu.edu (Li) writes:
>>
>>Again, as I have repeated, Tibetans are Chinese. Don't try to stir up
>>hatred among different Chinese groups. In the remote areas of China, everybody
>>has to live under harsh conditions. After all, China is still a developing
>>country.
>>
>If Tibetans are Chinese, why has the Chinese government systematically
>worked to wipe out all traces of native Tibetan culture?  (For, instance
>destroying 99.8% of Tibetan temples, destroying religious documents,
>works of art, books...)

Show your information source.  How can you get this wonderful
conclusion?  Are you a lier?

>Tibetans are NOT Chinese. Their language is as distinct from
>Chinese as their culture is. In fact, linguists divide the
>Sino-Tibetan languages in to at least two groups: Chinese and
>Tibeto-Burmese. The Tibetan language is very different from
>Chinese in its use of particles, sentence structure and even
>in the honorific language. Furthermore, Tibetan script comes from 
>northern Kashmir.
>
>(My info on Tibetan language comes from a 1991 post to soc.culture.china
>by Mark A. Sheldon.)
>
>Marc Pound 		--  "Don't forget, free Tibet!"
>mpound@astro.umd.edu

Comaring with the damage to the Indian' culture caused by Americans, the
damage caused by the Chinese government is very small.

J Su
From: UFDZ@UFPINE.BITNET
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
Subject: State statistics
Date: 27 Sep 92 23:27:00 GMT
Reply-To: UFDZ@UFPINE.BITNET
Organization: Indiana University

Definitely, the state stistics is wrong! because so many students who have
actively involved demonstrations have not got chance to go back China if they
do not want to keep silence. Gong XX who supported UMFN even did not get chance.
Dawei Zhou
From: yangze@acf3.nyu.edu (Ze Yang)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
Subject: Re: Conference, Sino-Tibetan Relations: Prospects for the future
Date: 3 Oct 92 00:06:43 GMT
Organization: New York University

richter@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (C. Richter) writes:

>***  To my dear debaters:  I am afraid that I cannot continue our 
>***  debates as I shall be busy for the next while.  I am only sorry 
>***  that Mr. Anonymous couldn't get back to me; he seemed to know 
>***  a thing or two.    

Thank Mr. Richter, frankly speaking I cann't see any point from his post, 
except he gave us a new definition of colony, and rationless
utterances like:
	"Tibet is a colony of China!"
	"Tibetan is not Chinese!"
	"Murdering Chinese is the last thing I would like to do!"
Mr. Richter should have known that there is a person called Adolf Hiltler 
(May be Mr. richter will proudly correct my spelling). Mr. Richter has 
definitely  mastered Hilter's method of "repeating
a lie one thousand times". 
 
Mr. Richter should have consulted his "legal secratary"
before he said "Murdering Chinese is the last thing I would like to do",
It's that because his "legal secratary" is "out to lunch"?

Tibet has been part of China for hundreds of years, Tibetans
have been enjoyed all the rights of being a Chinese citizen, why did Mr.
Ritcher say that Tibet is a colonly of China?

Ze Yang
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: zxu@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Xu)
Subject: Be Positive in the lobbying!
Originator: zxu@rodan.acs.syr.edu
Organization: Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 92 13:54:04 EDT

I saw so many HQ's instructions which told us that "ask your senators to urge
President Bush not pocket veto our bill". 

I strongly believe that talking in this kind of negative tone will give both
those senators and Bush an impression that pocket veto seems  correct and 
necessary. 

Why not directly ask Bush sign our bill?
Why not directly ask those senators to urge Bush sign our bill? 

Please talk in positive tone! 
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: Weixin Cheng <cheng@ATHENA.CS.UGA.EDU>
Subject:      Forwarding for HWANGK%VTCC1.BITNET@VTVM1.CC.VT.EDU
Reply-To: Weixin Cheng <cheng@ATHENA.CS.UGA.EDU>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1992 23:48:18 GMT
Comments: cc: HWANGK%VTCC1.BITNET@VTVM1.CC.VT.EDU

>From @VTVM1.CC.VT.EDU:HWANGK@VTCC1.BITNET Sat Sep 26 16:27:06 1992
Return-Path: <@VTVM1.CC.VT.EDU:HWANGK@VTCC1.BITNET>
Received: from VTVM1.CC.VT.EDU by athena.cs.uga.edu (4.1/25-eef)
	id AA24988; Sat, 26 Sep 92 16:27:04 EDT
Message-Id: <9209262027.AA24988@athena.cs.uga.edu>
Received: from VTCC1.BITNET by VTVM1.CC.VT.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
   with BSMTP id 7411; Sat, 26 Sep 92 16:26:13 EDT
Received: by VTCC1 (Jnet BSMTP V0.07) id 1236; Sat, 26 Sep 92 16:26 EDT
Date:     Sat, 26 Sep 92 16:26 EDT
>From: <HWANGK%VTCC1.BITNET@VTVM1.CC.VT.EDU>
Subject:  Please post this on china-nt, My posting was rejected.
Original_To:  @CHNT
Status: R

Dear Chinese Students:

     As you know, the second IFCSS Council Telecon will be held on Oct.2. The
Schedule and agenda have been posted a week ago. If you need it, let me know.
This message is for asking you to send your opinion, suggestion, question, and
idea concerning the operation, the problem, and the fate of IFCSS to me or the
Council memebers of your area. By doing this, you can influence IFCSS.

                  Kai Hwang (Council Member of Mid-Atlantic Area)

        CND-GETLIST@GAUSS.CASR.FAU.EDU, CHENG@ATHENA.CS.UGA.EDU,
        GHUANG@RISKY.ECS.UMASS.EDU, LISTS@LIBRARY.UTA.EDU
From: yangze@acf3.nyu.edu (Ze Yang)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
Subject: Re: Conference, Sino-Tibetan Relations: Prospects for the future
Date: 1 Oct 92 03:24:37 GMT
Organization: New York University

richter@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (C. Richter) writes:

>In article 1453 yangze@acf3.nyu.edu (Ze Yang) writes:
>>Do you think it is also an invasion that the Union's force 
>>marched to Gorgia? If it is so, than invasions don't mean bad.
> 
>Absolutely.  And if the US South wants independence then the question 
>should be addressed, peaceably by referenda, I would hope.  Do you 
>think the Tibetan people are capable enough to decide for themselves 
>in a referendum?
> 

If you think Abraham Lincoln did something wrong by "invading"
the southern states, then I have to say that we have very different moral
standards, also I am not sure how many people around the world
would share your view on this topic, I wish your view is not
too good to be practical.

Ze Yang

 
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: weidong@phi.ecn.purdue.edu (WANG)
Subject: rnone
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Distribution: q
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 00:43:30 GMT


Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: utingli@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu (Tingli Pan)
Subject: Re: Conference, Sino-Tibetan Relations: Prospects for the future
Organization: Educational Computing Network
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 20:47:18 GMT

In article <92Sep28.151848edt.145@orasis.vis.toronto.edu> liuyh@vis.toronto.edu (Yuanhui Liu) writes:
>
......

>hmmm, Nepal, maybe as long as they don't buy some military trucks and
>anticraft guns from China to "Threaten" India!  and India will swing
>its fat ass to start a total trade embargo to that poor land locked
>country.  Bhutan, I am not so sure, isn't the Indian Army there?  
>There is one more small kingdom between China & India, can't think
>of the name, had been all but annexed by India.  Come to regional
>terriorism/imperialism, you have to say that India is far ahead of
>China, behaving like a total bully in South Asian sub-continent.   
>>
It was called Sikhin. The ruler (not sure whether he was a king or not)
married an American girl. They were divorced later on, or maybe after he
lost his thrown.

>>Conrad Richter                     richter@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca

Tingli Pan
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: "(Wanbing Li)" <wanbing@HERCULES.GEOLOGY.UIUC.EDU>
Subject:      Re:  Some thoughts on CCSA and IFCSS
Reply-To: "(Wanbing Li)" <wanbing@HERCULES.GEOLOGY.UIUC.EDU>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1992 15:30:01 GMT
Comments: cc: taskforce@uiatma.atmos.uiuc.edu

Thanks! Mr. Hou.

You have posted a great article.

Dear fellow CSS, both here and in our motherland, what we need is
an institutional system of democracy, instead of certain individuals.
This is a lesson of our history. At this moment, this is also a test
whether we, Oversea Chinese Students and "SCHOLARS", accept the
principles of democracy.

Let us try to distinguish our appreciation from principles.
Let us try, for the first time in our Chinese history,
not to be too grateful to give up our principles.

We have long way to go. We need individuals like Zhao Haiching. But
also need our institution which can unite us to fight for our final
goal.

Let us support IFCSS.

Wanbing Li
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: UFDZ@UFPINE.BITNET
Subject:      Action of university of Florida, update.
Reply-To: UFDZ@UFPINE.BITNET
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 15:17:00 GMT

Many students of university of florida follow the instruction of CCSA/IFCSS to
collect American signitures, which will be sent to white house and senators by
fax or by express mail. UF will hold a all member meeting tonight for next step.
UF Lobby
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: HAIHUAN@ucs.indiana.edu
Subject:      A letter of urging President to veto the bill
Reply-To: HAIHUAN@ucs.indiana.edu
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 01:49:16 GMT
Comments: To: CHINA-NT@uga.cc.uga.edu

From:	PO1::"TAN%CWU.BITNET@cornellc.cit.cornell.edu" 29-SEP-1992 19:41:24.65
To:	blood-card@netix.com
CC:
Subj:	A letter of urging President to veto the bill

Today I faxed the following letter, my second one, to the President.
You are free to distribute it to anybody, in particular among the
late arrivals.
=============================================================================

September 29, 1992

To: President George Bush
Re: Bill S1216

Please veto this bill.  It is damaging the interests, equal rights, and equal
opportunities of Chinese nationals who arrived in this country after April 11,
1990.

The main reason for this bill, as it has declared, is the STATUS QUO of human
rights in China.  It is obvious that all Chinese nationals in the U.S., not
only those who arrived by an arbitrary date nearly three years ago, will be
confronting similar situation upon returning home if human rights will not
have improved by July 1993, as required by the bill. Why is this bill aiming to
protect only some of them, whereas totally ignore the others?

Those who are requesting you to sign the bill may claim they are working for
the human rights in China.  Have you received so many phone calls, letters, and
fax for the bill concerning China's MFN, to which Congress has attached human
rights requirements?

If this bill becomes law, it implied that those who arrived in after April 11,
1990 do not need protection, because if they did, the bill would have extended
to cover them.  This will put them in an extremely difficult situation, and
even deprive the genuine democracy activists of chance of success for regular
asylum application.

The bill will also put the late arrivals in a disadvantageous situation whey
they try to stay by finding employment.  Suddenly they have to compete with a
increased population of permanent residents.  It is obvious that employers are
more willing to hire permanent residents than foreigners.  I believe many
Americans' job or potentials will be negatively influenced by this bill, too.

Your earnest consideration on this issue is highly appreciated.

Respectfully,



(Signature)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: dqz9515@acf5.NYU.EDU (George Bush)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
Subject: Re: If I were the President
Date: 3 Oct 92 22:41:00 GMT
Organization: New York University

This is the worst statement I have ever read!@!!!!!!.


Dan Zhao
From: heping@plasma.gatech.edu (Heping He)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
Subject: Question about Sen. Simpson's act
Date: 26 Sep 92 19:39:47 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

Hi netters, as we all enjoyed the victory for S. 1216 passing the senate,
I am going to raise some questions about the process of this bill in the
senate and hope someone with inside information can assess such
posibility and prevent the abortive fate of the bill in the final stage.

I am not going to underscore anyone's effort by pushing this bill through
the Senate, but it seems to me that victory came TOO EASY! It is not like
a vateran politician's play if sen. Simpson's purpose is only to attach that
Summary Exclusion to the bill. Yes, it is too naive for a ranking
republican to do that kind of thing by its plain look. First, as JWH
pointed out early in this net, the amendment is logicaly conflict to the
S. 1216, i.e., either self conflict or redundent. Secondly, if Sen.
Gorton can threaten to attach S. 1216 the Forign Appropriation bill which
had to pass in order to keep federal agency running, why didn't Simpson
directly attach his amendment to this Forign Appropriation bill unless he
is sure that his amendment is controvercial enough to kill any package
attached. So we have dilema here, this amendment shouldn't surface by a
reputable ranking politician at the very beginning, if he did, he will
fight for it to kill S. 1216 though this it is still a very foul play.
What is the logic explanation here to explain his abortive attempt? 
Anyone cares to give posible reasons? It occurs to me that his intention
was not on the amendment itself but on S. 1216. If he wanted to kill the
bill without risking being a scapegoat, he could raise the noise in
Senate and then back off. By doing so, nothing changed in the bill but
delayed the time. Yes, time needed for president's pocket veto. If this
is his intention, the fate of the bill is doomed.  And I should call his
scheme is an excellent work, but not a masterpiece because it is still
quite abivious.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: kemnitz@netcom.com (Greg Kemnitz)
Subject: Re: Likelihood of Bush's pocket veto
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 92 21:51:55 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 

The number of Americans who know about the current bill is very small.  It has
not been mentioned in news, and I have not seen it discussed in any of the
local or national papers.  It could well die with a pocket veto and nobody
would know about it, until it was too late.

Perhaps a few Americans who are close to Chinese students know about it, but
they make up a vanishingly small number among the seventy million or so people
who will vote in November.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Greg Kemnitz                        | "I ran out of the room - I
MultiMedia Information Systems Inc. | didn't want to be killed by a pile
kemnitz@netcom.com                  | of VMS manuals" :-)
                                    |
                                    | --A friend at DEC Palo Alto in the Quake
From: txt15@po.CWRU.Edu (Tao Tao)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
Subject: Re: Conference, Sino-Tibetan Relations: Prospects for the future
Date: 28 Sep 1992 16:22:24 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc12.ins.cwru.edu


If Tibet does become an independent country, who will guarantee its soverenty?
I guess it will end up being annexed by India, the chief rival of China in
that region.

The establishment of the new state (Yi-Li-Na-Qiar) is a good evidence.

Tao
-- 
p
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china