HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: guang@ucbeh.san.uc.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: To those pro-Shen Tong guys
Date: 7 Sep 92 22:43:50 EST
Distribution: world
Organization: Univ. of Cincinnati

...> Beijing. Those killed by the CCP, their blood remains on the TAM square, those
> are very clean, very grorious blood. However CCP tried every mean to clean up
> those blood, they remained grorious and clean there. HOWEVER, in these three
> years those "d-fighters" did something that the CCP are unable to do: they
> contaminated those blood, they made those grorious blood dirty! How sad!!!
> 
> --HAMLET

What you said was very sensible and I like the part that you admired his
courage.  I am not involved at all in all these D-fighters' craps, but what
really breaks my heart is that I am stunned by so many people who for some
reason think or imply that Shen Tong (or maybe anyone else) just deserves
somehow to be put in jail.  This evil-side of my co-fellow students strikes 
me just as much as the news itself.  Why does everything have to be a game? 
I might be too naive to say this, but does it cross anyone's mind that 
HOW the hell the "Admerican Advisor" could get Shen Tong out of CHINESE
jail?  How?  I'd like to hear it.  Shen Tong may not have thought all the
risks he took, but honestly I do admire this guy's guts (despite everything).

I actually experienced the crackdown in Beijing three years ago.  And I
know I'll never forget all those days along with the fears and frustrations.
Some people said that if ST was really courageous, he should have stayed
in Beijing in the first place in 1989, and hey, I think that's really
bull-shit, pure and simple.  Whatever he (or "D-fighters") did here, does
not qualify him to be imprisonned in Beijing.  So anyone who says he
deserves it, die scum, just die.  And I actually think that it's them,
those cruel, evil-minded people who are the real danger of both China and
the country they choose to stay.

Guang Yang (yangg@acfcluster.NYU.edu)         on my old account

Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: roten@CUBA.gsfc.nasa.gov (Charles Roten)
Subject: Re: 150 F-16 to Taiwan
Organization: /cuba_b/dirbe/roten/.organization
X-Newsreader: GNU Emacs 18.57.1, GNUS 3.13, NNTP 3.10
	<1992Sep5.220247.29972@ringer.cs.utsa.edu>
	<1992Sep7.161956.2002@zip.eecs.umich.edu>
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 23:38:06 GMT

In article <1992Sep7.161956.2002@zip.eecs.umich.edu> cyc@z.eecs.umich.edu 
(Yi-Chieh Chang) writes:
 [cited stuff deleted]
>I agree with you that Jewish people are smart in doing business and making
>money, but that can trace back to thousands year ago, while Taiwanese just
>started no more than 20 years ago. Giving time, Taiwanese will become
>smarter and smarter. Appreciate your reminds.
>BTW, Isreal has 600+ F-16/F-15 fighters and 1000+ M1 tanks, how do you think 
>they get those weapons ? As far as this is concerned, Taiwanese are smarter 
>than Isreal, because we only consider to buy 150 F-16s not 600 of them.

This has nothing to do with intelligence or the lack of it, and 
_everything_ to do with the (correctly) perceived levels of threat 
faced by Taiwan and Isreal.  

Isreal has war-torn chaos to the north, Syria (who has _yet_, after more 
than 40 years, to recognize Isreal's right to exist or sign a peace 
treaty) to the northeast, Jordan to the east, and a none-too-stable 
Egypt to the southwest.  All connected to Israeli borders by LAND.  

But Taiwan is surrounded by that natural tank trap called the Taiwan 
Strait.  PLA Type 59 tanks float REALLY badly, you know ...  

Plus the fact that economic co-operation across that strait is a fact.  
A far cry from Isreal's situation (Jordan excepted).  

--
Charles Roten | Hughes-STX, Incorporated | 
  roten@cuba.gsfc.nasa.gov               | 'Use the Source, Luke!'
  7601 Ora-Glen Dr., Greenbelt, MD 20706 | 
  301-513-7805 (w),  301-317-0872 (h)    |            Obi-Wan Stallman
Xref: sparky soc.culture.china:25240 soc.culture.taiwan:13108 soc.culture.hongkong:10640
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan,soc.culture.hongkong
From: glo@dvlseq.us.oracle.com (George Lo)
Subject: Re: Mainland, Taiwan Island, Hong Kong, NOT U.S.A.
Organization: Oracle World HQ, Redwood Shores, California
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 20:16:17 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by an unauthenticated user
              at Oracle Corporation.  The opinions expressed are those
              of the user and not necessarily those of Oracle.

In article <9225123.19346@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> dht@cs.mu.OZ.AU (Joyous Dave baby) writes:
>Things like, "what if USA takes MFN away?"
>or, "if PRC becomes aggressive to Taiwan, will USA help?"
>or, "what will happen to HKG economy if China loses MFN?"

It probably hurts USA economy also.  US people have to buy
more expensive products produced either in US or elsewhere
in the world.  People's purchasing power will decrease.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: xzh@eddy.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (Xiang Zhou)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: Insensitive mainland chauvinist view. (Was: Who Cares 150 F-16s.)
Date: 11 Sep 92 18:23:23 GMT
Organization: Brown University
NNTP-Posting-Host: eddy.cfm.brown.edu

In article <1992Sep11.164318.3341@news.acns.nwu.edu>, usenet@news.acns.nwu.edu (Usenet on news.acns) writes:
|> >     Suppose Guangdong wants to be indepedent some day and pass
|> > a referendum, is that O.K. ? Then maybe other Provinces will follow.
|> > There will be some thirty countries on mainland, is that what you want ?
|> > 
|> 
|> Ask people in Guangdong whether they want independence. Ask them! Let them  
|> vote! If most people in Guangdong want to be independent, let them go! Again,  
|> let people choose their future! If most people in Guangdong or Fujian or Yunan,  
|> etc. want to be independent, you just can't stop them even you have troops of  
|> 10 million.
|> 

    I must admit that I have to try very hard to hold my anger and not to be
rude.  But I must ask: who the hell are you ?  If you are a Chinese, you must
be the first to sell your conutry and friends for your own good whenever
you have a chance. If you are not a Chinese, you must be someone who wants
to gain benefits from a chaotic China. Hostile forces had beaten the Chinese for
more than 100 years under the name of the Chinese people. You want to follow
them?  Whatever you are going to say, I will not response. It is shameful,
wasteful and stupid to argue with someone like you. I just hope that someday
you will grow up and get out of your Utopia. 

 

|> Economy is not the only concern. People leave not only because of the poor  
|> economy. There were quite a few American Jews went to Israel years ago to  
|> develop that country. Nobody forced them to go and the living standard were not  
|> as good. Why they went there? Ask yourself?
|> 
|> 
|> Carl
From: yangze@acf3.NYU.EDU (Ze Yang, , , )
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: F-16's fear?
Date: 8 Sep 92 23:34:00 GMT
Organization: New York University

xyang@bcars279.UUCP writes:

>Chinese"? BTW, Chairman Mao was the best in such thing -- how many 
>innocent citizens died during Culture Revolution in the hands of other 
>citizens? Please note that only very few (or close to none) died 

Reason for culture revolution can be so simple, our society need change,
people can feel that the old way doesn't work, that's the reason.

Ze Yang
Xref: sparky soc.culture.china:24938 soc.culture.japan:7774
From: davidg@aegis.or.jp (Dave McLane)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,soc.culture.japan
Subject: Re: Japanese Imperial Army Was Invited by CCP?
Date: 7 Sep 92 07:50:04 GMT
Followup-To: soc.culture.china
Organization: Aegis Society, Kyoto Japan

zzuo@iastate.edu (Zhiqi Zuo) writes:

>In article <2569@aegis.or.jp> davidg@aegis.or.jp (Dave McLane) writes:
>>zzuo@iastate.edu (Zhiqi Zuo) writes:
>>
>>>The above speculation is confirmed by my grandchildren,
>>
>>I guess you mean't grandparents....

>No. Sorry for having not made a typo.

Sorry I responded to your post thinking it was serious.

[* remainder of post omitted *]

Not wanting to make the same mistake again, I'll just pass
on the rest of your post.

Regards,

Dave

--
Dave McLane 
JUNET: davidg@aegis.or.jp (ONLY within Japan: post otherwise)
Nagaokakyoshi, Kyoto Japan Tel: +81-75-951-1168 Fax: +81-75-957-1087
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: hnakashi@alfred.carleton.ca (Hiroshi Nakashima)
Subject: test
Keywords: test only
Organization: Carleton University
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 00:04:48 GMT

This is test message.
From: zzhang@electron.rutgers.edu (ZhiZhong Zhang)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: HOW can Taiwan become independent?
Date: 13 Sep 92 19:08:57 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

Let's suppose Taiwan government does not claim to be the only legitmate
government of whole China. Instead, it claims to be a government of only
Taiwan and recognizes Communist government. Then will Taiwan be in any
different situation than it is now?

IMO, as long as commnunists don't recognize Taiwan government, Taiwan will
always be like it is now. Since,  all the countries in the world, when they
 established diplomatic relationship with CG(communist government), they
recognized Taiwan as a part of China. So, no matter what the Taiwan
government calls itself , be it "Republic of China" or "Republic of Taiwan,
it will not have any more diplomatic ties with
foreign countries--no country will be able to establish diplomatic relation
with Taiwan without cutting its tie with Beijing. It would only make CG more
hostile toward Taiwan. You see, Taiwan government just can't have their own
way-whichever way. Kind of sad, isn't it?
ZZZ
From: usenet@news.acns.nwu.edu (Usenet on news.acns)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: Insensitive mainland chauvinist view. (Was: Who Cares 150 F-16s.)
Date: 14 Sep 92 22:44:12 GMT
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, USA

In article <1992Sep14.215013.16656@tamsun.tamu.edu> x0y3510@tamuts.tamu.edu  
(Xuejun Yang) writes:
> In article <1992Sep14.165717.22137@ms.uky.edu> gang@ms.uky.edu (Gang Li)  
writes:
> >usenet@news.acns.nwu.edu (Usenet on news.acns) writes:
> >
> >>As long as you believe most people are not fool, then let them choose  
future  
> >>for themselves. If the majority of the not-fool-people choose to leave, do  
you  
> >	The logic problem here is the majority of what, should the majority
> >	of the country follow the majority of a province? Let history
> >	decide whether a country should exist, we have the right to select
> >	not sufferring, if we are the majority. As whether people are fool
> >	or not which depends on your standard.
> >>see there is a very very serious problem in China. If it were so (I doubt  
it  
> >>seriously), then there would be no need for a country call China exit in  
the  
> >>world.
> >
> >>Carl
> 
> This Carl is a fundamentalist. He uses extremely simple logic to solve
> this complex problem. He lives in a fantacy world, not seen what the
> reality is? He is very childish. 
> 

I have to say that some netters are as stubborn as traditional old men.

Carl
From: r2yg@VAX1.CC.UAKRON.EDU (Yuehua Guo)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: Michael Chang in US Open Semi-Final!
Date: 14 Sep 92 05:10:58 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: The University of Akron, Akron, Ohio

In article <1992Sep12.172531.24932@mcshub.dcss.mcmaster.ca> yu@physun.physics.mcmaster.ca (Fan Yu) writes:
>In article <1992Sep11.223243.12414@ringer.cs.utsa.edu> cqu@ringer.cs.utsa.edu (Chang-ning Qu) writes:
>>In article <1992Sep11.212947.2196@objy.com> cw@orion.uucp (C.W. Chung) writes:
>>>
>>>Another interesting notes: the US top men tennis players are either
>
>BTW, anyone got any idea of Lendl's racquet? Someone told me he uses
>110lb tension. The highest I have seen in sports stores only goes
>up to 75 lbs.
>

I just looked my Tennis magazine Sept. 92 issue.  It has the following
data about Lendl's racquet:

Racquet:  Mizuno
Model:    IL-F302Z
String:   Babolat VS Nature
Tension:  73 lbs

By the way, Lendl's racquet string tension is the highest among the top man's
players.  Monica Seles is the other one among the women. Her string tnesion
is 83 lbs.  Of course, string tension used is very much related to the type of 
racquet as well as the court surface conditions.  The above information is 
-- 
:-)%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%   Oops, another 30 minutes wasted!                       %
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%(-:
Xref: sparky soc.culture.china:25573 soc.culture.taiwan:13379
From: li@sicvax.enet.dec.com (Tong-Kang Li)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan
Subject: Re: Who Cares 150 F-16s.
Date: 15 Sep 92 03:32:43 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation


In article <14SEP199217025857@deimos.ucc.umass.edu>, s9874194@deimos.ucc.umass.edu (s9874194) writes...
>In article <1992Sep13.130955.2999@nntpd.lkg.dec.com>, li@sicvax.enet.dec.com (Tong-Kang Li) writes...
>> 
>>In article <1992Sep13.010033.24246@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>, yewang@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Yenwen Wang) writes...
>>>In article <11SEP199213305227@phobos.ucc.umass.edu> s9874194@phobos.ucc.umass.edu (s9874194) writes:
>>> 
>>>It's sad to see people from mainland and Taiwan bickering against
>>>each other. I think this comes from a misunderstanding on the
>>>personal level and misinformation by the governemnts. 
>>> 
>>>ps. Before you criticise, think if you have been influenced by CCP
>> 
>>I dont know how many Mainland Chinese in the US can speak freely when
>>they have family in China and may go home someday. I am pretty sure 
>>someone is watching over. Those Mainland Chinese who have independent 
>>thinking may have to stay silence. As a result, what we read may not 
>>represent majority opinion of Mainland Chinese in the US.
>> 
> 
>Almost all the students here have relatives in China and most of them
>do have direct relatives in China. My parents and two brothers are
>in China as well as all the other relatives. I have been speaking
>straight all the time, even when I was in China (you may not beleive
>it but it was a fact.) Am I afraid of anything? I do not.
> 
> 

c.q.: (I assume I am talking to right person)

After reading several of your posts, I dont think you will have any trouble 
when you go back to China, most of your opinion is quite in line with CCP's. 
I am not going to argue your political belief here because You are the one 
to make choice. (BTW, my impression you are more like CCP's reformer).

But I am talking about those who stay silence. Everyone knows there is
no freedom of speech in China, so you can imagine how much freedom 
Mainland Chinese in the US can speak out against the current political 
systems in China without the fear of retaliation.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan
From: claudius@leland.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu)
Subject: Re: Insensitive mainland chauvinist view. (Was: Who Cares 150 F-16s.)
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 92 17:52:45 GMT

In article <1992Sep15.141044.29969@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu> utingli@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu (Tingli Pan) writes:

>The Chinese government is recognize as an official one by either USA or
>France, then selling weapons to its enemy is an obvious insult. Due to
>the circumstances, China and USA do have an agreement that USA can sell
>weapons to Taiwan when Nixon visited China. Although the amount and
>level of the weapon is debatable. But other European countries selling
>weapons to Taiwan is a way of violation of the rules made by those
>countries themself.

But there is precedence.  For example, most countries (including the U. S.,
I believe) recognized the former Sandinista government of Nicaragua as the
legitimate government of Nicaragua, but they supplied their opponents, the
Contras, with weapons and other supplies.

Another example would be the case of Cambodia.  Before the withdraw of
Vietnamese troops, most entities (including the United Nations) recognized
the Khmer Rouge government as the legitimate one in Cambodia; however, they
supplied weapons and other supplies to other factions, including one led by
Prince Sihanouk (sp).

>Right, the selling is for US's own benefits. But non of Bush or Clinton
>would have said such word. (They are talking about the peace, or some
>thing like that in Asia) Otherwise China has every right to sell
>anything to any country without concerning the objection from US.
>Actually China already starts that, selling nuclear technique to Iran.
>If both sides don't restrain themselves then the consquense is not very
>pleasant. What US is going to do now? Selling F-16 c/d, F-18, or F-22 to
>Taiwan. And China, put nuclear bomb on sale? Of course none of those
>will be the concern of you. As far as you have some toys you will be
>happy.

But there is a difference.  Nuclear proliferation is not in anyone's best
interest, including China's.  But I don't see how Taiwan getting F-16s can
endanger China or other countries around Taiwan.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: usenet@news.acns.nwu.edu (Usenet on news.acns)
Subject: Re: Insensitive mainland chauvinist view. (Was: Who Cares 150 F-16s.)
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, USA
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 20:58:34 GMT

In article <liqiang.716240777@kramden> liqiang@kramden.nyu.edu (Li) writes:
> gang@ms.uky.edu (Gang Li) writes:
> 
> >usenet@news.acns.nwu.edu (Usenet on news.acns) writes:
> 
> >>>     Suppose Guangdong wants to be indepedent some day and pass
> >>> a referendum, is that O.K. ? Then maybe other Provinces will follow.
> >>> There will be some thirty countries on mainland, is that what you want ?
> >>> 
> 
> >>Ask people in Guangdong whether they want independence. Ask them! Let them  
> >>vote! If most people in Guangdong want to be independent, let them go!  
Again,  
> >>let people choose their future! If most people in Guangdong or Fujian or  
Yunan,  
> >>etc. want to be independent, you just can't stop them even you have troops  
of  
> >>10 million.
> 
> >>Economy is not the only concern. People leave not only because of the poor  
> >>economy. There were quite a few American Jews went to Israel years ago to  
> >>develop that country. Nobody forced them to go and the living standard were  
not  
> >>as good. Why they went there? Ask yourself?
> 
> 
> >>Carl
> 
> >Is this the guy who asked Chinese to build a strong China?
> >Gees, how many pay checks he gets. May be it is the drug....... HIV........
> >:x
> >how to quit
> >	
> >		#@$%@%^@% 
> >}#@$%{[]
> 
> Oh, yes, he has published a lot of intelligent thought on what he deems a
> future China on the net. 
> 
> - Li, Qiang
> 


Why you guys are so afraid of letting people choose their future ( apparently  
people in PRC can't vote for their future now). Why you guys are so angry about  
this. In fact, I don't think people in Guangdong or Fujian would choose to  
leave now. You guys acted as if they would choose to break away if they are  
given the chance. 

Oh, I see, deep in your hearts, you even think many Chinese would leave as you  
guys and China will disappear. That's why you are so afraid. Don't worry.  
Things are not so bad yet. 

Carl

Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: billzh@i88.isc.com (Bill Zhou)
Subject: test
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 18:47:12 GMT

test
From: yeh@netix.com (Mr Shannon Yeh)
Subject: Re: The short term solution
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Organization: Netix Communications, Inc.
Date: 10 Sep 92 22:39:22 GMT

Lots of private mails arrived at my mbox since i posted my war idea: some of 
them criticized me (as usual), some of them indicated understanding, some of
them indicated other alternatives.  i am employed full time--it is impossible
for me to respond all the mails.  After you read this message, if you still
do not understand what i am talking about, feel free to talk with me privately.


     |     /_____   __\_/___     --- |\    /       / /___   / \___  ----  __\__
   __|__   |__|__    |-|   |    --|--|-  __|_ |-| /|   |/  /| |  |  |__|  __|__
     |    _|__|___   |=| | |     /|  |/   /|\ |_|  |  /|\   | |  |  |-|- ___|__
     |        |      | |  \| ,   \|   \|   |       |  \|    | | \|  |/ \|


  \ |    ___|___	     |  __\_/__    _\_   |     __\|__  ----  ___\___
 _\_|__   __|__    -----   --|-- --|--       |   /\       / |  |--|   __|__
    |			    /|\ ---|---      |  /  \     / \|  |-|-  ___|____
    |			     |     |    ,    |//    \   /  \|  |/ \|

  |===|     / __|__   ___|___  /    /___     /          |     |===|   ------
 -------   /|  -|-       /\   /|--|    |    /|---|   ___|___ -------   |-||
   /|___    | --|---    /  \   |--|  / |     |---|   |__|__|    /|--   |_||
  /\|_____  |   | \|   /    \  |__|   \| ,   |---|   |__|__|   /\|___    \|
					     |___|

  |=|=|     /   /___        |       |------|   __|___   -----  _\_ __\___
 ------\   /|--|   |    |---|---|   |------|     /         /     |  ----
   |--|     |--| / |    |___|___|   | --|--|    / |--|    |      |   --
   || |     |__|  \| .      |       | __|\_|   /  |==|    |      |   |=|
    /\			    |	    |______|  /   | \|   \|      /\_______

  |_ |_    ---   --       __\___     |  |      ____\_    -----   \_____
 ||/ |_/   -|-  -----     __\_/__    |  |           /    |----   |____|
   ---     _|_/  | |        |==|   \_|  |__\       /     | ---   |  | |
  -----         /  |__|   /|_\__|\                /_____ | |_| , |  |\|

 __\__ __|_\_   /--/ _\_/_     __|___   -----
  |==|   |     |---| --|--   \ __|__|      /
   /|\   /\    |=|=| --|--   |/  /\       |
   \|   /  \|  | | |   |        /  \      |
					 \| .

    ------  __|__          _|_|==|      ___|___     |     /__|__   /__|__
    |----    \|/    -----  /|\|==|      |__|__|   |_|__|  ___|___   --|--
    ||--|  ---|---         /|__\__|\ ,     |                / |__\  __|___
    /|__|    /|\
  
   ---         ___\____  ___\___   _|_  ---   __|__ __\__   _\  __|__  -----
  --|-- ___     __|__    | -|_|-  ---/-  |/     |/   |=|      |  \|    |---|
   /|\  |_|   ____|____  / |-|-|    /|=| |}    /|  |-----|    |  \|    |--|--
    |						|  | |=|\|    /\______ |/  \|

  ___\___  --|_|--   /\
   --|--    |=|=|   /--\
  ___|___  ---|----  |\|
              |      |   .


     /            ____
    /------       |__|
      ___ |     ___|___
      |_| |        |_____
         \|            \| .

shannon
-------
From: derekhu@spock.usc.edu (Derek Hu)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: USA 301 trade retaliation list.
Date: 11 Sep 1992 13:56:56 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: spock.usc.edu

Because of the trade war with China, US sometime ago published 
a list of China's products which subject to US punitive tariff
under so called code 301.

Can anybody send me the list of items and the tariff rate.
Or tell me where can I find the list?

What are the normal rate (under MFN) for those items, the rate
under 301, and the rate without MFN.  

Thanks.

- Derek Hu






Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: q0l5828@tamuts.tamu.edu (Qun Lou)
Subject: Air Ticket College_Station or Dallas --> New York for Sale
Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 20:13:30 GMT


                      Airline Ticket For Sale

Are you going to New York to visit this art center of the world?
Is there an important interview at New York waiting for you?
Don't miss the opportunity.
There is an extra airline ticket that would carry you to this exciting city.

From: either College Station, TX or Dallas
To  : New York
Type: One Way
Price: $100
Traveling Date: September 25 or another time

For more information, please contact by email: q0l5828@tamuts.tamu.edu

Don't miss the opportunity waiting for you in New York.