HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Lian Zheng <LZHENG@ucs.indiana.edu>
Subject:      Shen Tong 's arrival:   I watched It On TV
Reply-To: Lian Zheng <LZHENG@ucs.indiana.edu>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 06:28:00 GMT

I watched the arrival of Shen Tong on TV in 1989.

Mr. Shen at that time did show (or pretend to show )
to the audience that he escaped from China with the help of some
kind-hearted people.  He looked like that he was very concerned about the
safety of the people involved in his escape, so that he would not reveal
any information related.   Shen said something like this on TV:  I can not
tell you anything except to tell you that someone gave me a phone # in US
so I can get help when I successfully reached the US.   Mr. Shen
actually read the phone # to the TV reporters there.
(Can someone with better memory correct me please, in case I tell something
wrong?)

Now, someone on the China-NT and SCC said that Mr. Shen actually went through
normal procedures to come out, making use of the disorder occured around 6.4.
Is someone trying to discredit Mr. Shen as a 'Democray fighter', or the
other way around?
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china,soc.culture.china
From: xlli@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (xiao-lin li)
Subject: Long March Under the Leadership of IFCSS.
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 22:30:55 GMT


Qiushou (Fall Harvest) Uprising: Dec. 1986, more than 2,000 Chinese
sign letter protesting Chinese government's purge of Hu Yaobang and
Fang, Wang, Liu.

The Fifth Anti-Encircling: CCP government killed thousands of
Beijing students and civillians. Students in US made historical
protests against the Chinese government. However they were facing
gloomy future on returning home.

Zunyi Meeting: IFCSS took leadership, lobbied Congress and President
for the Executive Order.

Zhang Guotao Oppotunitist Line: CMFN campaign.

Arrived Shaan Bei: Protection Bill signed by President Bush.

Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: "(Jialin)" <jialin@SASA.RUTGERS.EDU>
Subject:      Re:  note
Reply-To: "(Jialin)" <jialin@SASA.RUTGERS.EDU>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 21:00:20 GMT
Comments: To: china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu

>     Would you please tell us more about Zhao Haiqing, the great name, our
>hero, just as Americans were told about their commander in chief of the gulf
>war. I would like to show my appreciation to him and all other guys who did
>the great job for us.

I agree Zhao did a good job. "The great name" ... aren't you too much?
Yes, please donate to IFCSS HQ and maybe ZHao himself, but please
don't "just as Americans were told about their commander in chief of
the gulf war". Thanks.

- jialin

PS. The "protection" bill is suppose to protect CSS
in the States from CCP. Now you are protected, it's time to get people
like Shen Tong and Wei Jingshen free.
From: HWANGK@VTCC1.BITNET
Subject:      Donate to IFCSS
Reply-To: HWANGK@VTCC1.BITNET
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 19:49:00 GMT

Dear Friends:

     Protection Bill has been signed into law by President Bush. It is a great
success of Chinese Students and our Independent Federation of Chinese Students
and Scholars(IFCSS). Without the hard work done by vast number of Chinese
students and IFCSS activists, without the nation-wide coordination of IFCSS,
this law would hardly become true.
    In the massive lobby effort, we got familiar with the following names(in
random oder):Geng Xiao, Zhao Haiqing, Zhang Qingsong, He Baoping, Li Jinghong,
Ding Gian, Hu Junwei.... All of them are brilliant, devoted members and
activists of IFCSS. There are many other IFCSS activists who are not so
well known also contributed greatly to this effort: the IFCSS Council members,
CND editors,.... What I want to emphasize here is that unity is strength. It was
true to the protection Bill lobby, it will also be true in our future struggle.
Our final goal is to have a China which is prosperous, free, democratic, and
ruled-by-law.
   To achieve this, we have a long way to go.The rights and interests of Chinese
students need to be further protected, the cause of human rights in China need
to be continuously promoted. For the future of Chinese students and the future
of China, support IFCSS - your own organization.  While celebrating the success
of the Protection Bill, let's donate some money to IFCSS:


                             IFCSS
                             733 15th Street,
                             N.W. Suite 440,
                             Washington, D.C. 20005


                            A Chinese student
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: cshi@cs.ulowell.edu (Chunde Shi)
Subject: Re: A Moral Issue
Organization: University of Massachusetts at Lowell Computer Science
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 17:48:14 GMT

In article <1992Oct8.084904.8015@ac.dal.ca> poppy@ac.dal.ca writes:
>President Bush indicated in the last night show that it was wrong for Clinton
>to demonstrate against his own country (against U. S. policy in Viet-Nam War)
>in a foreign territory though Bush did seem to more tolerate the demonstration
>before the White House during Gulf War.
>
>Cliton was against U. S. invasion when he was in England in 70's.
>Those Chinese students are against the "CCP dictatorship" in U. S today.
>What is the difference?
>
>It seems to me that dirty politicians sometimes consider issues "morally" rather
>than politcially.
>
>I think it was politically right for Mr. Clinton to demonstrate against U. S.
>wherever since he believed the war was wrong for americans and world peace.
>
>If it is morally wrong, can it be politically right?
>
>Dose Mr. Bush think it is morally wrong for Chinese students to demonstrate
>against their own country (represented by the CCP goverment) ? 

There is a code of behavior for Americans and America: Talk positive
,no matter what you are doing, good or evil.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: echeng@phys.psu.edu (Eddie Cheng)
Subject: Re: IFCSS HQ NR-4052: Situation Analysis and Strategy
Organization: Penn State, Department of Physics
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 23:45:16 GMT

In article <92282.181737SXS30@psuvm.psu.edu> <SXS30@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
   [...about Bush's visit to Penn State campus...]
>  However before George's
> arrive, the palce where address was given was cleared by security
> personal and university. Since there was a rumor that only those who
> support Bush will given a ticket to lisen to the speech, the organizer

	It was not a rumor.  Tickets were given to people hours away from
	here.  The organizers initially planed to allow only ticket-holders
	in, but gave up at last minute after protest.  A large VIP area is
	still ticket-holders only.

> of protest group decided to set up several tents on the ground and
> stay a night at the place so that they can get a good place to see Bush
> and let Bush see their protest. To my supprise, the second day in the
> morning, there was no single protester exist inside the circle close
> to the stage where Bush suppose would be. All the protest students
> were droven away by police ( I only know there was no one died -0)).


	According to Collegian, the student newspapers, all protestors were
	"politely asked to leave" at 6am in the morning and everybody
	complied.  (Certainly not as heroic as students in TianAnMen Square...)

	It had been raining during the night they camped there...


    Eddie
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: ylq@lems23lems.brown.edu (Yan Shen)
Subject: Re: Freedom or persecution
Organization: Laboratory for Engineering Man/Machine Systems
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 15:11:35 GMT

In article <1992Oct15.175136.3704@memstvx1.memst.edu>, comp11234020@memstvx1.memst.edu writes:
|> 
|> 
|> 	There, I see some people persecute, verbally abuse, and
|> whip Shannon Yeh...
|> 
|> 	You people who are abusing him will ALLOW for only ONE view,
|> and that is your own. It does not matter weather I agree with him 
|> or disagree with him, he should have the right to express HIS view
|> without being characterized (as Carl did) as a Maoist. That is FREE
|> SPEACH. Leave him alone. Get off his back. Time may prove him right.
|> 
|> 
|> A person in group A


Are you saying "you people" are not exercising their right of freedom of 
speech ? Read a couple of postings cooked by Shannon Yeh and you might be 
able to discover how vicious he has been. The word "persecution" is absolutely 
a misnomer here. 
Xref: sparky talk.politics.china:1901 soc.culture.china:27815
From: xiaobo@ee.su.oz.au (Cai Xiaobo)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china,soc.culture.china
Subject: Looking for Jing Zi-song and Yang Li-nong
Date: 13 Oct 92 23:47:39 GMT
Reply-To: xiaobo@cocka2 (Cai Xiaobo)
Organization: Electrical Engineering, The University of Sydney, Australia

If anybody knows Mr. Jing Zi-song, who is supposed to be Ph.D student in 
Montreal University, Canada, and Yang Li-nong, who was graduated from 
Zhejiang University, Hangzhou and is studying in USA now, please email me 
or tell them that I am loking for them.

Thanks!   My email addr. is xiaobo@ee.su.OZ.AU
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: "(Zhenqin Li)" <zli@IRIS116.BIOSYM.COM>
Subject:      Fwd: WEN Yuankai, SU Xiaokang and CHEN Kuide to visit UT Austin
Reply-To: "(Zhenqin Li)" <zli@IRIS116.BIOSYM.COM>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 16:40:09 GMT
Comments: To: china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu

From: PCHEN@utxvm.cc.utexas.edu
Subject: Wen Yuan-kai, Su Xiao-kang and Chen Kui-de will visit Austin

Reformer & Scientist Wen Yuankai, Prof. at USTC (Univ.of Sci.& Tech. of
 China, Hefei) and visiting Prof. at Caltech, will visit Univ. of Texas at
 Austin. Prof. Wen will give a speech at RLM 4.102 at Oct.17 (Sat) 7:30
 P.M. WEN'S TOPIC IS "THE CHANCE FOR OVERSEA CHINESE STUDENTS IN THE NEW
 Wave of China's Economic Reform".
Writer Su Xiao-kan and Literature Critic Chen Kui-de at Princeton will
 visit Univ. of Texas at Austin at Oct.24 (Sat). Their speeches are
 SCHEDULED AT 7:30 P.M.(SAT) AT UT RLM 4.102.
 SU'S TOPIC IS "THE FUTURE TRENDS OF CHINESE CULTURE, A COMPARATIVE STU-
 DIES BETWEEN MAINLAND AND TAIWAN. CHEN'S TOPIC IS "SOME THOUGHTS AND
 Reflections on China's Culture Trends and Waves in 1980s."
THE EVENTS ARE SPONSORED BY CSSA AT UT AUSTIN AND RESEARCH CLUB OF CHINA
 STUDIES RESPECTIVELY.    FOR MORE INFORMATION, PLEASE CALL (512)471-
 7253 DR.CHEN OR MR.WEN (DAY) OR (512)837-1022 DR.PING CHEN (EVEN).
 UT RLM BUILDING IS LOCATED AT 26TH ST.AND SPEEDWAY NEAR IH-35 EXIT FROM
 LBJ Library & Univ. of Texas.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: zl@apollo.hp.com
Subject: RE: A victory?
Originator: zl@pace
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 19:38:03 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, MA

In article #1786 Mark A Libucha wrote:
>        In the wake of the passage of the bill, many people here have used
>the word "victory". As I see it, at this point it is only a victory for
>perhaps 100,000 Chinese invividuals. Whether or not it is a victory for
>China depends on what these people do in the future.
>        And some seem to be confused about who the victory was won against.
>The tone of many of the postings makes it seem like it was the American
>legislative system that was beaten, like it was some game to get something
>for nothing.
>        Would the people who died at the Massacre call this a victory? They
>set you free, and you waged your campaign on principles they died for. Has
>the victory been realized? Is China any better off due to this new law?

Mark, it's a victory, yes, it is. If you don't like it, too bad. This law
enables thousands of _Chinese_ talents stay here permanently in this great
country. Further more, they will be able to vote in a few years. They are
smart. Surely some people don't want to see this happens. Too bad for them.
China definitely will be better off due to this new law. Don't believe it?
Let's wait and see: china bashing will be reduced to near zero in a year,
not even to mention longer term benefits. Ciao.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: "(Dong Chen)" <dong@LPF.UMD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Ng's attack on Mr. Shen Tong
Reply-To: "(Dong Chen)" <dong@LPF.UMD.EDU>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 01:10:35 GMT
Comments: cc: CHINA-NT@uga.cc.uga.edu

>        No matter who is Shen Tong, CG does not have the right to arrest him
>for a peaceful action. This is a terrible human right violation. If Mr. Shen

But the reality will tell anybody that CG are not ready to allow such thing
happen now. Shouldn't shen be a little bit concern about others and be more
statrategically ?

>        I would like advise Mr. Ng, go to fight with the human right violation
 o
>f CG, do not fight with someone can not answer you!     Dawei Zhou, Florida

If we doncann't bear criticism for our dear "hero", how can you expect CG
 tolerate
Shen Tong ?
From: joe@astro.as.utexas.edu (Joe Wang)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
Subject: Re: Conference, Sino-Tibetan Relations: Prospects for the future
Date: 7 Oct 92 13:22:04 GMT
Organization: McDonald Observatory, University of Texas @ Austin

In article <BvEp0A.MK7@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca> richter@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (C. Richter) writes:
>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.  

First of all, you need to define "self-determination."  The way it is
generally accepted internationally, self-determination applies only to
political entities and not ethnic ones.  For example, Nigerians are
entitled to self-determination, but Biafrians are not.  In the way,
it's been used internationally, the "right of self-determination" does
not the "right to secession."

Second, it's not obvious that "the right to self-determination" has
been a positive thing.  The general result of this right is that a
corrupt, oppressive, colonial administration has been replaced by a
corrupt, oppressive, local administation.  In many instances, this has
not even removed the element of ethnic oppression in that the rulers
are still from an ethnic group which is dissimilar from the local
population.

So if you want the people on the net to accept your version of the
"right to self-determination" you need to first define exactly what
you mean by self-determination and then argue that it's a good thing.
Otherwise, you can't expect people to understand what you are saying
nor can you expect people to agree with you.

Personally, I reject the "right of self-determination" as it is
currently internationally formulated, and argue for a "right of
self-government" and a "right of free association" which is completely
different.  People living in Tibet have the right to a locally
government which has power to act on all matters which do not affect
the rest of China, and on matters which do affect the rest of China
the voice of people living in the T.A.R. should be no less then other
voices.

In the interest of decreasing ethnic tension, I'd even argue that the
Chinese central government ought to discourage Han immigration into
Tibet, and introduce "affirmative action" programs to favor the hiring
of ethnic minorities in the central government.

But unless secession is essential to exercising local self-government
(and I don't think it is in the case of Tibet), I would rule it out.

>China will eventually lose its colonies also.

Again, you need to argue that Tibet is a "colony" of China.  Surely
you don't expect people just to change their minds without one. 

This point has been argued in the past, and the general consensus is
that you can argue that Tibet is an integral part of China just as
easily as you can argue that it is not.


Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: "(George Zhu)" <zhu@RISKY.ECS.UMASS.EDU>
Subject:      Forwarding: Chinese Student Protection Act
Reply-To: "(George Zhu)" <zhu@RISKY.ECS.UMASS.EDU>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 15:21:31 GMT
Comments: To: china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu

Standard disclaimer applies.  Forwarded without permission.

George
------

Organization: Penn State University
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 20:12:36 EDT
From: <AXP900@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Chinese Student Protection Act

I just finished reading the text of the Chinese Student Protection Act.  I
have a suspicion that this is a political football.  The catch in the Act
is that the President can at any time before July 1, 1993 deem it safe for
the citizens of the PRC to return to China and the act is null and void.  This
is great, President Bush can have a hay-day about his record on Human Rights,
(after he took a beating in the last debate over the Eagleburger-Skowcroft
visit in July 1989 he needs something.) and in June 1993 or January 19, 1993
if he wants to, he can please his old buddies in Beijing and declare it
safe to return.  What a sweet deal for everyone...except of course all of
the soon-to-be-unemployed Students and Scholars who have their precious green
cards but NO JOBS, that is of course if the US Government can still remember
four years ago when TAM happened.  Think twice, as the old addage goes..
"Don't count your chickens (or PR's) until they hatch."  and that will be
in July 1993.


Wade Sheen
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: IFCSS HQ <ifcss@WAM.UMD.EDU>
Subject:      HQ NR-4057:  Implementation of S1216
Reply-To: IFCSS HQ <ifcss@WAM.UMD.EDU>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 21:10:38 GMT
Comments: To: ccnl@utarlvm1.uta.edu, china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu

**************************************************************
IFCSS Headquarters News RElease No. 4057      October 13, 1992
           IMPUT NEEDED ON IMPLEMENTATION OF S1216
**************************************************************
Independent Federation of Chinese Students and Scholars (IFCSS)
   733 15th Street, N.W., Suite 440, Washington, D.C.20005
         Tel. (202)347-0017  Fax: (202)347-0018
                Email: ifcss@wam.umd.edu


           Input Needed on Implementation of S1216
           =======================================


     With President Bush putting his signature to S1216,
preliminary implementation work is already under way. Obviously,
INS cannot wait till next June to  work on detailed regulations
regarding the implementation; they have to get prepared. And there
is not much time left for them.

     The IFCSS Committee on Public Relations and Government Affairs
is preparing a report on concerns that our students have about the
implementation of S1216. The report, which shall be submitted to
INS, is expected to be an important source of input for INS
officers. From past experience, particularly the President's
Executive Order, we know that various problems can arise when it
comes to individual cases. This time, IFCSS hopes that all the
major complications can be identified beforehand so that we will be
prepared to discuss with the administration. To help us achieve
this goal, please inform us your specific concerns. An example is
spouses and children who arrived after April 11, 1990; we want to
make sure that they will be covered. You can share your concerns
with us through e-mail, phone or fax.

     Thank you for your attention.

                         IFCSS Headquarters
                         IFCSS Committee on Public
                         Relations and Government Affairs


***************************************************************
         IFCSS Headquarters Office    Signature
***************************************************************
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: qiang@cubmol.bio.columbia.edu (Qiang Zheng)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
Subject: Re: Action-9201.appendix
Date: 7 Oct 92 14:00:56 GMT
Organization: Columbia University, Biological Sciences Dept.

Are you trying to threaten people by this future possible 
misunderstanding?  That's the way CCP always do!  Are you
going to say that the news posted at this group has also
been monitored?  People should make their own decision
without threatened by future possible "misunderstanding".

James
From: joe@astro.as.utexas.edu (Joe Wang)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
Subject: Re: Conference, Sino-Tibetan Relations: Prospects for the future
Date: 9 Oct 92 02:04:05 GMT
Organization: McDonald Observatory, University of Texas @ Austin

In article <BvGBzw.L30@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca> richter@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (C. Richter) writes:
>We may have to leave the areas returned back to the aborigines.  But 
>funnily enough, there hasn't been a mass exodus so far from lands 
>already given back.  I guess the aborigines like and trust "whitemen"
>now.

You've just destroyed your own position.

Canada retains sovereignty over the lands "given back to the
aborigines."  The land "given back to the aborigines" do not have the
power to conduct their own defense and foreign policy, and the
provinces and Ottawa retain the power to legislate in those areas.

If you consider this arrangement acceptable for Canada in regard to
the aboriginal lands, why is this arrangement unacceptable for China
in regard to Tibet?  

>I suppose you supported the Japanese when they invaded China too. 
>You can't have it both ways. 

LOOK!!!!!!!

Japan invaded China under the pretext of aiding the Manchurian people
in their quest for "self-determination" and "independence."  This is
one reason, many of the Chinese on the net vigorously oppose the idea
that any part of China can secede.  

Even if you disagree with the opinions of most of the people on the
net, you need to acknowledge that there are solid historical reasons
for them.  If you ignore those reasons, you will never get anywhere.

>Tibet *is* a colony.  I have already stated that. 

Would you or would you not find a settlement similar to the one
reached between the Canadian government and aborigines in Canada to be
acceptable as a model for Sino-Tibetan relations?

If not, why not?  And what are you doing to demand that the Ottawa
government conduct a referendum in the aborginal areas concerning
compete independence from Canada (including a separate army, a seat in
the United Nations, a separate foreign policy)?

If so, then there needs to be no further argument on this subject.
From: ningluo@ACSU.BUFFALO.EDU ((Ning Luo))
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
Subject: A reaction of Chinese Government toward S1216
Date: 14 Oct 92 13:31:40 GMT
Reply-To: "(Ning Luo)" <ningluo@ACSU.BUFFALO.EDU>
Organization: Indiana University
Comments: To: ccnl%utarlvm1.BITNET@acsu.buffalo.edu, china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu

AP Network News, 10/14/92:
The Chinese Government protests the legislation which will allow
about 70,000 Chinese students to stay in US permenantly if they
fear being persecuted by returning to China.  The spokesman of
Chinese Foreign Minister said the legislation, which was signed
by President Bush into law last week, is "absolutely unacceptable".
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china