BBC reports: possibly not a terrorist attack, but a dispute over growing beards
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27-04-2013, 11:33 PM (This post was last modified: 28-04-2013 12:17 AM by HU.Junyuan.)
Thumbs Down BBC reports: possibly not a terrorist attack, but a dispute over growing beards
Doubts over China government claims on Xinjiang attack

According to the report:

[1] Selibuya, where the conflict happened, is a pretty remote location and undeveloped. And now is pretty much a scaring police state zone.

[2] Government claims are not worthy of being trusted. The tension including this conflict is majorly because of China's rule which is to blame.

[3] To be exact, the government rules that "women must not wear full veils, and only men who are over 40 years old are allowed to grow beards".

[4] Therefore 6 innocent heroes sacrifices to punish those brutally tyrants, burning and killing 15 of them. And 8 heroes gave up the chances of fleeing, held their ground, yet failed and were captured.

Great. So we have some pretty good news.

[1] Even people in the most remote desert regions of China are well equipped with the spirit of fighting for freedom, and in this case, for full veils and beards, by any means involving, but not limited to, killing police and civil workers with blades and burning people alive. With a little bit more effort of this kind, democracy is just steps away.

[2] The Chinese government's rule is just loose. See? Merely 6 innocent unprepared brave heroes' lives were sacrificed in exchange with the death of 15 ill-intentioned incompetent government tyrants. These tyrants were just lame.

[3] China is under tyranny rule. How could any terrorist survive in China under such circumstances? Must be impossible.

[4] In conclusion, with funds dedicated to support those reliable freedom fighters and help provided by the media, time is right for a "China Spring" or an "Any Color but Red Revolution".

[5] BBC has always been a unbiased and credible source of news, whereas the Chinese government can tell nothing but lies.

What do you think?

I am upset because I feel it's unfair that when I heard the Boston bombing I was saddened by the good American people hurt by such violent behavior, while when my good people were hurt in many ways quite similar a week after the bombing, U.S. diplomat and BBC report sounded like that it is these people and their superiors in the government to blame.

Want something? Then do something.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-04-2013, 11:43 PM
RE: BBC reports: possibly not a terrorist attack, but a dispute over growing beards
(27-04-2013 11:33 PM)HU.Junyuan Wrote:  Doubts over China government claims on Xinjiang attack

According to the report:

[1] Selibuya, where the conflict happened, is a pretty remote location and undeveloped. And now is pretty much a scaring police state zone.

[2] Government claims are not worthy of being trusted. The tension including this conflict is majorly because of China's rule which is to blame.

[3] To be exact, the government rules that "women must not wear full veils, and only men who are over 40 years old are allowed to grow beards".

[4] Therefore 6 innocent heroes sacrifices to punish those brutally tyrants, burning and killing 15 of them. And 8 heroes gave up the chances of fleeing, held their ground, yet failed and were captured.

Great. So we have some pretty good news.

[1] Even people in the most remote desert regions of China are well equipped with the spirit of fighting for freedom, and in this case, for full veils and beards, by any means involving, but not limited to, killing police and civil workers with blades and burning people alive. With a little bit more effort of this kind, democracy is just steps away.

[2] The Chinese government's rule is just loose. See? Merely 6 innocent unprepared brave heroes' lives were sacrificed in exchange with the death of 15 ill-intentioned incompetent government tyrants. These tyrants were just lame.

[3] China is under tyranny rule. How could any terrorist survive in China under such circumstances? Must be impossible.

[4] In conclusion, with funds dedicated to support those reliable freedom fighters and help provided by the media, time is right for a "China Spring" or an "Any Color but Red Revolution".

[5] BBC has always been a unbiased and credible source of news, whereas the Chinese government can tell nothing but lies.

What do you think?

Are you still upset that a US diplomat used neutral language to describe this event now? I'm not sure what happened yest but it being exactly as the chinese government first reported seems like at least not the whole truth.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-04-2013, 12:09 AM
RE: BBC reports: possibly not a terrorist attack, but a dispute over growing beards
(27-04-2013 11:43 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  Are you still upset that a US diplomat used neutral language to describe this event now? I'm not sure what happened yest but it being exactly as the chinese government first reported seems like at least not the whole truth.

It's not my intention to point at you. But this "neutral language" and "whole truth" thing is just where I find double standard lie in.

[1] Do you think the Boston bombing being an unfortunate incident induced by questionable U.S. government religion and minority policies is neutral language? And do you think the U.S. government and media have reported "whole truth" and definitely with no CIA planning behind their backs?

[2] Do you think the Xinjiang mass killing being an unfortunate incident induced by questionable Chinese government religion and minority policies is neutral language? And do you think the Chinese government and media have reported "whole truth" and definitely with no government agencies' planning behind their backs?

Do you have memories of 1984 and hearing people repeatedly say that communism is evil ringing a bell, so that you will say no to [1] and yes to [2]?

Sometimes I find I&I's threads somewhat neutral language instead of an obsession with conspiracy theory as many other replies expressed.

So, I am curious: what should be the standard for "neutral language" and "whole truth" and not "conspiracy theory obsession" or "partial truth"?

Want something? Then do something.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-04-2013, 12:20 AM
RE: BBC reports: possibly not a terrorist attack, but a dispute over growing beards
We hear you brother.

The irony is not lost on us.

The ability to create a standard for 'neutral' language requires first a negation of overt and/or covert political agendas and even less likely, every listener / observer having the ability to shed their own cultural baggage.

It requires a definition of a 'neutral' culture.

Desirable but probably impossible.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes DLJ's post
28-04-2013, 12:41 AM (This post was last modified: 28-04-2013 12:47 AM by HU.Junyuan.)
RE: BBC reports: possibly not a terrorist attack, but a dispute over growing beards
(28-04-2013 12:20 AM)DLJ Wrote:  We hear you brother.

The irony is not lost on us.

The ability to create a standard for 'neutral' language requires first a negation of overt and/or covert political agendas and even less likely, every listener / observer having the ability to shed their own cultural baggage.

It requires a definition of a 'neutral' culture.

Desirable but probably impossible.

I also examined myself about why I felt so upset and used languages somewhat too strong in emotions. And I find that I tend to trust authorities (Chinese, U.S and British alike) due to feelings instead of rational thinking.

I liked to trust U.S. government, so I really hate those terrorist attacks that took so many civilian lives.

I liked to trust U.S. government, so I felt hurt when the U.S. spokesman who denied this killing in China as a terrorist attack.

I liked to trust BBC, so I believed it always had unbiased reports.

I liked to trust BBC, so I felt hurt when BBC attribute this bloodshed to the government's treating minorities badly, whereas in China it is government policy to give preferential treatment to the minorities which makes many Han Chinese feel unfair.

And for the same reason, although I like to trust the Chinese government, why couldn't it withhold some vital information and not showing it to the public? So is it possible that it was because of the veils and the beards?

With very slim chances, YES, it is possible, which I still find quite ridiculous.

And I really crave for neutral language in all the discussions I will be in, which I know is no that easy. And it's better to let more ration in instead of more emotions.

Anyway, thank you, DLJ.

Want something? Then do something.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes HU.Junyuan's post
28-04-2013, 08:50 AM
RE: BBC reports: possibly not a terrorist attack, but a dispute over growing beards
(28-04-2013 12:41 AM)HU.Junyuan Wrote:  
(28-04-2013 12:20 AM)DLJ Wrote:  We hear you brother.

The irony is not lost on us.

The ability to create a standard for 'neutral' language requires first a negation of overt and/or covert political agendas and even less likely, every listener / observer having the ability to shed their own cultural baggage.

It requires a definition of a 'neutral' culture.

Desirable but probably impossible.

I also examined myself about why I felt so upset and used languages somewhat too strong in emotions. And I find that I tend to trust authorities (Chinese, U.S and British alike) due to feelings instead of rational thinking.

I liked to trust U.S. government, so I really hate those terrorist attacks that took so many civilian lives.

I liked to trust U.S. government, so I felt hurt when the U.S. spokesman who denied this killing in China as a terrorist attack.

I liked to trust BBC, so I believed it always had unbiased reports.

I liked to trust BBC, so I felt hurt when BBC attribute this bloodshed to the government's treating minorities badly, whereas in China it is government policy to give preferential treatment to the minorities which makes many Han Chinese feel unfair.

And for the same reason, although I like to trust the Chinese government, why couldn't it withhold some vital information and not showing it to the public? So is it possible that it was because of the veils and the beards?

With very slim chances, YES, it is possible, which I still find quite ridiculous.

And I really crave for neutral language in all the discussions I will be in, which I know is no that easy. And it's better to let more ration in instead of more emotions.

Anyway, thank you, DLJ.

This is why I shouldn't respond to things at 2 in the morning. All I meant by my post was this "Do you understand now why the US doesn't always take everything reported by the Chinese Authorities at face value?"

I don't really trust any government completely believe me the US has done enough shady things over it's history to make you want to quadruple check if it makes a claim that the sky is blue and the sun will rise in the east. Authoritarian governments, such as China (improving but still) Russia (sadly regressing again) Libya (under Ghadfi), have such a history of just whitewashing all events regardless of what actually happened that anything they say is just not really trusted.

Your chinese and you love your Country, that is completely understandable to anyone not named earmuffs. I think all of us here get annoyed when what we feel like slights are made against the country of our births as well. So when another country refers to what you were told was a terrorist attack in diploma-speak (the art of saying nothing while talking) I can understand you being upset but from our point of view China (and many other countries where the government has monopoly control over news) have cried wolf many times. Tiananmen square was called a "counterrevolutionary riot" by the chinese until outside reporters basically caught them in the lie.

As to this event I have no idea what actually happened but it sounds very shady. The BBC said in that report that the locals had been told by officials not to speak to reporters and to me that sounds more like a government cover-up than a response to terrorists.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-04-2013, 12:12 PM (This post was last modified: 28-04-2013 12:30 PM by HU.Junyuan.)
RE: BBC reports: possibly not a terrorist attack, but a dispute over growing beards
(28-04-2013 08:50 AM)Revenant77x Wrote:  This is why I shouldn't respond to things at 2 in the morning. All I meant by my post was this "Do you understand now why the US doesn't always take everything reported by the Chinese Authorities at face value?"

I don't really trust any government completely believe me the US has done enough shady things over it's history to make you want to quadruple check if it makes a claim that the sky is blue and the sun will rise in the east. Authoritarian governments, such as China (improving but still) Russia (sadly regressing again) Libya (under Ghadfi), have such a history of just whitewashing all events regardless of what actually happened that anything they say is just not really trusted.

Your chinese and you love your Country, that is completely understandable to anyone not named earmuffs. I think all of us here get annoyed when what we feel like slights are made against the country of our births as well. So when another country refers to what you were told was a terrorist attack in diploma-speak (the art of saying nothing while talking) I can understand you being upset but from our point of view China (and many other countries where the government has monopoly control over news) have cried wolf many times. Tiananmen square was called a "counterrevolutionary riot" by the chinese until outside reporters basically caught them in the lie.

As to this event I have no idea what actually happened but it sounds very shady. The BBC said in that report that the locals had been told by officials not to speak to reporters and to me that sounds more like a government cover-up than a response to terrorists.

Although I don't agree with you on some points, but the fact that we are able to exchange ideas is worthy of our efforts.

And about the Tiananmen Square thing, here I've found a Q&A containing information that is compatible with what I saw on TV when I was a child: "ONE PHOTOGRAPH was published in Granta which clearly showed two mutilated bodies. They were, however, those of two Chinese soldiers, hanging from a burnt-out bus in Tiananmen Square."

Let's stop this issue right here. Your sayings and reasoning definitely has influence on me. And I hope the information I offer can help you understand some different aspects you might not come across before. In that case, we are all good.

And about the possibility that the recent Xinjiang conflict could be a government cover-up, I would say yes possible, but more possible if money (benefits) is involved. And I think the reason for the Boston bombing is also likely to involve monetary (benefits) causes. As an atheist, I really don't buy it that it was all under religious influences that kind of thing. And I hope the government can show the evidences as completely and publicly as possible. I really don't feel like seeing Xinjiang Massacre of Minorities and Crackdown of April, 2013 in the future, which by BBC and U.S. State Department now is more like a government crackdown and will very likely become a massacre in western media's eyes.

Want something? Then do something.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-04-2013, 12:22 PM
RE: BBC reports: possibly not a terrorist attack, but a dispute over growing beards
(28-04-2013 12:12 PM)HU.Junyuan Wrote:  
(28-04-2013 08:50 AM)Revenant77x Wrote:  This is why I shouldn't respond to things at 2 in the morning. All I meant by my post was this "Do you understand now why the US doesn't always take everything reported by the Chinese Authorities at face value?"

I don't really trust any government completely believe me the US has done enough shady things over it's history to make you want to quadruple check if it makes a claim that the sky is blue and the sun will rise in the east. Authoritarian governments, such as China (improving but still) Russia (sadly regressing again) Libya (under Ghadfi), have such a history of just whitewashing all events regardless of what actually happened that anything they say is just not really trusted.

Your chinese and you love your Country, that is completely understandable to anyone not named earmuffs. I think all of us here get annoyed when what we feel like slights are made against the country of our births as well. So when another country refers to what you were told was a terrorist attack in diploma-speak (the art of saying nothing while talking) I can understand you being upset but from our point of view China (and many other countries where the government has monopoly control over news) have cried wolf many times. Tiananmen square was called a "counterrevolutionary riot" by the chinese until outside reporters basically caught them in the lie.

As to this event I have no idea what actually happened but it sounds very shady. The BBC said in that report that the locals had been told by officials not to speak to reporters and to me that sounds more like a government cover-up than a response to terrorists.

Although I don't agree with you on some points, but the fact that we are able to exchange ideas is worthy of our efforts.

And about the Tiananmen Square thing, here I've found a Q&A containing information that is compatible with what I saw on TV when I was a child: "ONE PHOTOGRAPH was published in Granta which clearly showed two mutilated bodies. They were, however, those of two Chinese soldiers, hanging from a burnt-out bus in Tiananmen Square."

Let's stop this issue right here. Your sayings and reasoning definitely has influence on me. And I hope the information I offer can help you understand some different aspects you might not come across before. In that case, we are all good.

And about the possibility that it could be a government cover-up, I would say yes possible, but more possible if money (benefits) is involved. And I think the reason for the Boston bombing is also likely to involve monetary (benefits) causes. As an atheist, I really don't buy it that it was all under religious influences that kind of thing.

Not sure about money but I will say Power was a prime motivator for Boston. Thats what terrorism is a grab at power. But keep us posted on this story I am interested in what actually happened, probably somewhere between the villagers side and the official report is the truth.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-04-2013, 12:38 PM
RE: BBC reports: possibly not a terrorist attack, but a dispute over growing beards
(28-04-2013 12:22 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(28-04-2013 12:12 PM)HU.Junyuan Wrote:  Although I don't agree with you on some points, but the fact that we are able to exchange ideas is worthy of our efforts.

And about the Tiananmen Square thing, here I've found a Q&A containing information that is compatible with what I saw on TV when I was a child: "ONE PHOTOGRAPH was published in Granta which clearly showed two mutilated bodies. They were, however, those of two Chinese soldiers, hanging from a burnt-out bus in Tiananmen Square."

Let's stop this issue right here. Your sayings and reasoning definitely has influence on me. And I hope the information I offer can help you understand some different aspects you might not come across before. In that case, we are all good.

And about the possibility that it could be a government cover-up, I would say yes possible, but more possible if money (benefits) is involved. And I think the reason for the Boston bombing is also likely to involve monetary (benefits) causes. As an atheist, I really don't buy it that it was all under religious influences that kind of thing.

Not sure about money but I will say Power was a prime motivator for Boston. Thats what terrorism is a grab at power. But keep us posted on this story I am interested in what actually happened, probably somewhere between the villagers side and the official report is the truth.

Terrorism is business, my friend. And Power is always the ability to distribute benefits. What if terrorists prearranged short-selling of the indexes and then told two blindly religious guys to set off the bomb? What if terrorist were contending in the competition of who can perform more influential activities for the right of controlling terrorism funds?

I will keep an eye on how this conflict thing will go and update it in some thread.

Want something? Then do something.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-04-2013, 01:00 PM
RE: BBC reports: possibly not a terrorist attack, but a dispute over growing beards
Quote:And I find that I tend to trust authorities (Chinese, U.S and British alike) due to feelings instead of rational thinking.

Understatement of the week.

[Image: 3cdac7eec8f6b059070d9df56f50a7ae.jpg]
Now with 40% more awesome.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: