Welcome to China.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
14-06-2013, 02:13 PM
RE: Welcome to China.
(14-06-2013 12:14 PM)Free Thought Wrote:  Actually, after reading this I did do some more research into this.

As an aside, I do not mind at all if you ignored my previous post. Frankly, I find the passive aggression fascinating.

Whatever. I am glad that we are still on the same 'communication protocol' so that we won't misunderstand each other, let alone deliberately so.

(14-06-2013 12:14 PM)Free Thought Wrote:  It turns out that he did not in fact have a petition per se, rather, he had sighed and by some reports co-authored Charter 8, essentially a petition, made in the image of the anti-Soviet Charter 77 by dissidents in Czechoslovakia released in 1977, it calls for reformation to the constitution, independent judiciaries, a removal of the Government's hold of the military, the removal of the one party system and the subsequent right to vote, among several other requests.

By some other reports, he is the main author of the so-called Charter 2008.

Are you sure he didn't say in the Charter and his online proclamations he wrote , that he wanted to establish a new republic to REPLACE the current one ?

I guess you don't ask people on the streets to sign a "petition" by informing them first of a new structure of the country by you design, and then that you want their help to overthrow the current political structure and build a new nation under your lead. That is "essentially" called delusional and paranoid, isn't it ?

(14-06-2013 12:14 PM)Free Thought Wrote:  He was arrested on charges of "Inciting subversion of state power". This is a real charge in China.

Also, an interesting thing about the law I quoted is the portion "... or any other means to subvert the State power ..." This, I must say, is a ingeniously added portion to the Law and I admire whomsoever was involved in and responsible for its inclusion for the artful incorporation of the piece. I mean, it's a prosecution lawyers dream inclusion! A statement so deliberately vague and stretchable that you could put a street preacher up on those charges and get away with it with a simple bending of words and liberal use of literal definitions. It is ingenious, it's brilliant, it's perfect for somebody who wants a trump card to pull out when no other charge seems to rightly cover the job at hand. Flawless for a group which, in the same sentence, makes it clear it does not want it's authority questioned.

Well, here we have an issue with the laws. A practical advice would be to modify this part, clarify what exactly these means are. Definitely more practical than demanding the establishment of a new country. Do you think so ?

Want something? Then do something.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-06-2013, 02:16 PM
RE: Welcome to China.
(14-06-2013 01:44 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  So you have no idea what prompted those actions then?

I have quite some idea about what prompted those actions. And it is a game called "I am here to surprise you: Guess ..."

From where are you able to draw the conclusion that "so you have no idea ... then" ?

Want something? Then do something.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-06-2013, 02:24 PM
RE: Welcome to China.
(14-06-2013 01:49 PM)Chas Wrote:  Re-read what I said and try to understand the difference between violence and dissent.

Re-read what I said and try to answer this following question as I asked in my previous post, please, slippery Chas,

(14-06-2013 11:20 AM)HU.Junyuan Wrote:  Since your last "I don't know", it's been some time.

Have you done your research and found out which way the Nobel Peace Prize winner called for to transit China from one-party rule to multiple-party rule? Violence or impeachment?

Hopefully not another "I don't know".

Tongue

How about answering my questions straight forwardly ? Letting me always repeat my question a second or a third time is even more lame than "I don't know".

Want something? Then do something.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-06-2013, 02:29 PM
RE: Welcome to China.
(14-06-2013 02:16 PM)HU.Junyuan Wrote:  
(14-06-2013 01:44 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  So you have no idea what prompted those actions then?

I have quite some idea about what prompted those actions. And it is a game called "I am here to surprise you: Guess ..."

From where are you able to draw the conclusion that "so you have no idea ... then" ?

No from your refusal to answer direct questions about it is my reason for wondering what you know about it.

(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
14-06-2013, 02:34 PM (This post was last modified: 14-06-2013 02:37 PM by HU.Junyuan.)
RE: Welcome to China.
(14-06-2013 01:53 PM)Chas Wrote:  He was breaking the law by disclosing what he disclosed. That is why he didn't do it in Washington.

He signed a contract that required him to keep quiet about the work he was doing.

Is this too sophisticated for your mental capabilities ?

Such good free speech environment so that Snowden didn't want to try any legal solution first ? Is he determined to break the law even if he apparently has other means to reach his goal ?

It's so funny that you stopped talking about free speech, freedom and human right, and started to talk about law.

Then why do you support this Nobel Peace Prize Winner broke the law and was sentenced guilty ? Isn't it too hypocritical of you to do so ? Are your legally qualified to judge which law is law and which law isn't law ?

Too sophisticated for your mental capabilities after all, I think.

Want something? Then do something.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-06-2013, 02:39 PM
RE: Welcome to China.
(14-06-2013 02:29 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(14-06-2013 02:16 PM)HU.Junyuan Wrote:  I have quite some idea about what prompted those actions. And it is a game called "I am here to surprise you: Guess ..."

From where are you able to draw the conclusion that "so you have no idea ... then" ?

No from your refusal to answer direct questions about it is my reason for wondering what you know about it.

Well, look up the word "patience" in the dictionary. Have some of this stuff. It might help.

Want something? Then do something.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-06-2013, 02:41 PM
RE: Welcome to China.
(14-06-2013 02:24 PM)HU.Junyuan Wrote:  
(14-06-2013 01:49 PM)Chas Wrote:  Re-read what I said and try to understand the difference between violence and dissent.

Re-read what I said and try to answer this following question as I asked in my previous post, please, slippery Chas,

(14-06-2013 11:20 AM)HU.Junyuan Wrote:  Since your last "I don't know", it's been some time.

Have you done your research and found out which way the Nobel Peace Prize winner called for to transit China from one-party rule to multiple-party rule? Violence or impeachment?

Hopefully not another "I don't know".

Tongue

How about answering my questions straight forwardly ? Letting me always repeat my question a second or a third time is even more lame than "I don't know".

He did not advocate violence. He is imprisoned for "counter-revolutionary propaganda and incitement".
What he petitioned for was change; a change from one-party, authoritarian rule to a multi-party democratic government.
This is the mark of a totalitarian government - it cannot bear criticism.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
14-06-2013, 02:53 PM (This post was last modified: 14-06-2013 02:59 PM by HU.Junyuan.)
RE: Welcome to China.
(14-06-2013 02:41 PM)Chas Wrote:  He did not advocate violence. He is imprisoned for "counter-revolutionary propaganda and incitement".
What he petitioned for was change; a change from one-party, authoritarian rule to a multi-party democratic government.
This is the mark of a totalitarian government - it cannot bear criticism.

Chas, why always so slippery ...

I am not going to find the quote of you saying about Snowden's breaking the law.

This man is sentenced to imprisonment, on a court, because, he, broke, the law. Yes or No ?

(Third time) Have you done your research and found out which way the Nobel Peace Prize winner called for to transit China from one-party rule to multiple-party rule? Violence or impeachment? (Hint: a previous such example is the transition from the USSR to the Russian Federation)

What is your answer?

Want something? Then do something.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-06-2013, 03:04 PM
RE: Welcome to China.
(14-06-2013 02:41 PM)Chas Wrote:  This is the mark of a totalitarian government - it cannot bear criticism.

Hey, party and government, I think the way you guys handle the 1989 Tiananmen Square thing is quite bad, and I have said similar things on this forum quite a few times. --- HU.Junyuan, a communist member and a citizen.

Look, that's a public criticism.

Let's see whether you are wrong again, Chas ...

Want something? Then do something.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-06-2013, 03:06 PM
RE: Welcome to China.
(14-06-2013 02:53 PM)HU.Junyuan Wrote:  
(14-06-2013 02:41 PM)Chas Wrote:  He did not advocate violence. He is imprisoned for "counter-revolutionary propaganda and incitement".
What he petitioned for was change; a change from one-party, authoritarian rule to a multi-party democratic government.
This is the mark of a totalitarian government - it cannot bear criticism.

Chas, why always so slippery ...

I am not going to find the quote of you saying about Snowden's breaking the law.

This man is sentenced to imprisonment, on a court, because, he, broke, the law. Yes or No ?

(Third time) Have you done your research and found out which way the Nobel Peace Prize winner called for to transit China from one-party rule to multiple-party rule? Violence or impeachment? (Hint: a previous such example is the transition from the USSR to the Russian Federation)

What is your answer?

Piss off.
I answered it.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: