CCPs are copying everything from KMT, including rule of the mob for sure! Sadly not only Lu is unconsicious, but also Hu is…

I have checked one of best public forum in China: http://www.yannan.cn. As one of the first public forums covering what was happening in Taishi, it’s still closed even after one week of the national holiday. I did not think it’s abnormal because it was shut down earlier because of the same national holiday and reopened after the holiday. Now it seems that it won’t be open again in the near future.

October 9, 2005 @ 7:53 pm | Comment

That’s really discouraging. Does Hu think if he puts his hands over his eyes, it makes the problem go away? Or is this not his decision?

October 9, 2005 @ 7:56 pm | Comment

There is a Chinese saying: The mountains are high, the emperor is far away. So true in this case.

October 9, 2005 @ 8:12 pm | Comment

It’s really hard to tell if Hu agree with this or not.
Hu has started to repress the independent media, groups and think tanks since the last year. His strategy could be turned out very tricky. I am personally very afraid of his tricks and what his tricks could do to China. His thinking style could be similar to Mao ZeDong’s, or Cao Chao’s (in 3 nation period), but I would expect he is more like Deng Xiaoping or Jiang JingGuo. I don’t want to have another Chinese leader like Mao who was only good at the manipulation of power.
By the way, simon and ESWN also have coverage on this incident. According to them, the people who were beated by the mob not only include Lu, but also including some other reporters (from SCMP, radio france..etc.) in a different incident.

October 9, 2005 @ 8:14 pm | Comment

Maybe it’s people like those in the previous thread who boast of the independence of thought among this country’s citizens who informed this “very soft-spoken man, one of those skinny guys who looked like he might start tearing at any moment” as the Guardian article describes him, that he’s free to speak his mind. His corpse and grieving family are the best way to show such apologists for what they are.

October 9, 2005 @ 8:57 pm | Comment

Independent thinking is not equal to free speaking. You don’t have to pay price for thinking, but you will pay for what you are saying in China.

October 9, 2005 @ 9:02 pm | Comment

If I remember correctly, among the “3 major black hands” in the Taishi election, the lawyer Guo Feixiong is still in prison, the legislator Lu from Hubei province was beated almost to death if news source is reliable. The only one left is the professor from Zhongshan university: Ai Xiaoming. The local government is very efficient.

October 9, 2005 @ 9:13 pm | Comment

It is nice to see that something is done efficiently in China! I also liked the way in the article having beaten this man to death or severely crippling him at the very least they still managed to blame it on the foreigners in the traditional Chinese style. A round of applause all round for a job well done

October 9, 2005 @ 10:13 pm | Comment

Yeah, I remember how Cao Cao was one of Mao’s models – also Shang Yang.

Reasons to worry, right there!

October 9, 2005 @ 10:32 pm | Comment

These f0cking election candidates badly need bodyguards. A country full of kungfu masters and now a practical use for them. Surely the shaolin monks have time to beat a few local government mafioso and protect the weak, what about jet li the rich man? What does jet li do with his kungfu? I am seething with anger.

October 9, 2005 @ 11:01 pm | Comment

Yeah. The central government has to start putting its money where its mouth is, as we like to say. If they are going to give rhetorical support to the notion of local elections, they need to get some force behind it and protect those who challenge the local authorities.

I hate to see what will happen in China if they don’t.

October 9, 2005 @ 11:06 pm | Comment

Great post Lisa. I couldn’t honestly read all the details of the beating, I really can’t take stuff like that. Whether it be humans or dogs or anything, I can’t handle it.

Thanks very much for publicising this outrage and well done with the trackback. Nice work.

October 10, 2005 @ 7:49 am | Comment

Lisa writes:

To me, “mafia-isation” perfectly describes what has gone on as ideology and totalitarianism have loosened their grip on today’s China. We should all be grateful that for many Chinese people, the quality of life has improved and the range of personal freedom greatly expanded. I also believe that the central government has made some positive steps in in their struggle to establish a more coherent set of rules and regulations by which businesses and government agencies should function, particularly in areas such as environmental regulation. But they seem to lack the ability to enforce these good intentions on a local level. And this recent media crackdown does Beijing no favors. A more independent media at least could provide some feedback on what is really going on, in those places where the Emperor is far away.

Wonderful stuff. You summed up modern China in a nutshell perfectly. There’s not a thing that I can add.

October 10, 2005 @ 7:53 am | Comment

This is one of the most upsetting posts ever put up on this site. Thanks Lisa – I hope absolutely every visitor here sees it. And if any of them says something along the lines of, “Well, police in America beat people, too,” all I can say is that’s an absurd and irrelevant statement. Yeah, cops everywhere abuse their power at times, but this is in a class by itself. It is about a corrupt system that continuously encourages brutality for its survival; it’s in no way a case of Rodney King-style police brutality.

October 10, 2005 @ 8:05 am | Comment

…and further Richard, the ones that are caught are punished in the U.S.

October 10, 2005 @ 8:15 am | Comment

Richard,

You said this is in a class by itself? Let me second that, by comparing it not just to America, but to post-Communist Russia:

Since Russian democratisation began around 1991, yes there has been a steady trickle of political murders – like the shooting of Galina Starovoitova (MP) in St Petersburg in 1998. I remember that event well, and it threw some fear into me – but it was NOTHING compared to THIS! And let me tell you why:

It’s because, when the Chekists/Mafia of Russia assassinated Starovoitova, they did it FAST, shot her dead before she knew what hit her.

I mean, at least the political murders in Russia are fast and relatively clean and painless. The Russian KGB/Mafia don’t get off on torturing political opponents, like the CCP goons evidently do.

So it seems China has to catch up with Russia’s relatively more civilised way of murder, before it can even dream of catching up with America.

(Dripping with sarcasm here, in case any readers can’t tell.)

October 10, 2005 @ 8:16 am | Comment

Martyn – and in America, the video is shown nationwide and there are demonstrations and public outrage and a neverending stream of TV and print coverage. (And so, of course, we are back to the role of a free media and how China can never really cease to be a police state without this freedom).

Ivan, I got the sarcasm, and I appreciated it.

October 10, 2005 @ 8:21 am | Comment

Exactly, good points.

October 10, 2005 @ 8:24 am | Comment

I was going to do a post on this myself, but I did some digging around and came up with two very different versions, one of which said that the missing man was alive and well, and another that said that he was in hospital and that it was touch and go whether he would survive or not.

I also heard that somebody sent a suspect text message claiming that Joffe-Walt himself was beaten nearly to death, and an account that said that Lu and Joffe-Walt were in seperate places when the incident happened, and that Joffe-Walt was only told about Lu, but didn’t see what happened.

I’ve also heard a report that said that the men who did the beating were a private mob hired by the villagers.

Long story short, I’m not certain enough about this to do a story on it, and I think that you should prepare a pinch of salt on this one until something more solid comes up.

Read Zone europa for a bit more on this.

October 10, 2005 @ 9:38 am | Comment

Always a good point, ACB. But I do tend to trust the Guardian. It’s a good paper, and they generally get things right.

October 10, 2005 @ 9:59 am | Comment

And if any of them says something along the lines of, “Well, police in America beat people, too,” all I can say is that’s an absurd and irrelevant statement.

————–

richard, you are just too sensitive. this comes up to my eyes when i surf other news sites, so i bring it to here hoping others might add more details.

October 10, 2005 @ 10:09 am | Comment

But I do tend to trust the Guardian. It’s a good paper, and they generally get things right.

Posted by Other Lisa at October 10, 2005 09:59 AM

——————-

agree. european media have a higher credibility rate than american ones, generally speaking

October 10, 2005 @ 10:11 am | Comment

Martyn – and in America, the video is shown nationwide and there are demonstrations and public outrage and a neverending stream of TV and print coverage. (And so, of course, we are back to the role of a free media and how China can never really cease to be a police state without this freedom).

Ivan, I got the sarcasm, and I appreciated it.

Posted by richard at October 10, 2005 08:21 AM

——————-

anything could become a proof that american system is superior.

ccp used to be the master that turns every failure into “great victory”, now we might have another one that could match ccp

October 10, 2005 @ 10:15 am | Comment

I almost feel sorry for the leadership in Beijing. They must be appalled at the sheer stupidity of local security people,beating a man, maybe to death, in front of a foreign reporter. Smart, guys. Real smart. Just turning them back from the village would’ve made it another non-story about repression in China. I hope in a day or so this blows up into a more international news story. It should be.

October 10, 2005 @ 10:58 am | Comment

Probably we all underestimate the role of central government in this incident. Right now all we know is that CCP’s Guangdong province committee has decided to cover everything up. However one intriguing thing is that:
at all most all major public forums in China, Taishi has become a censored word since half month ago. Not a single newspaper or TV station is allowed to report anything on Taishi even if People Daily’s local edition praised the Taishi election earlier. It’s hard to imagine that Guangdong province can have power to control the public forum nationwide. It is clear that the central government is playing some role here. Or I can say, the central government is covering this up currently. If it’s true, then Guo, Lu, and Ai et al should immediately give up. They won’t win over the central government. The best advice is just to let it go.
It is also interesting to ask the motive of the central government. Is there any possibility that Guangdong province report inaccurate information to Beijing? Is there any corruption chain in this accident which may reach the higher level than Taishi local officials? If the motive of the central government is only to prevent the massive scale of Taishi-like grass root democratic movement in the future by shutting up media, there seemingly have a better solution: which is to get rid of the corrupt officials and acknowledge the newly elected officials, and then simultaneously cover every thing up and censor all the information related to the incident.
I more or less intend to think that someone at the central government was misled and manipulated by the local government, (which has been that way for many years) or someone else in the central government decides to ignore the whole thing because of the sensitivity of it, for the sake of his power by not doing something potentially wrong.
There is another possibility that at this stage the goal of central government is to establish a controlled democracy at the bottom level. Anything which can spin out of their hands is not welcome. I understand the Chinese leader may have some concern about bottom level democracy turning into populism in the massive level, which may result in some unforeseen disasters in the future. However I hardly can imagine the advantages of the controlled democracy.

October 10, 2005 @ 2:51 pm | Comment

The CCP’s Propaganda Department will say the beating and death of Mr Lu was necessary for “economic development”

October 10, 2005 @ 4:54 pm | Comment

From what I’m hearing, Lu was beaten but survived, and at least one man was killed. ACB, it’s still worthy of a post – it was a savage act.

October 10, 2005 @ 6:04 pm | Comment

Bingfeng said:
“anything could become a proof that american system is superior.”
well bingfeng, isn’t the fact that the news is covered in america proof of the superiority of the system? don’t just say “anything.” but there are “plenty of things.”
I could also think of plenty of things to show the superiority of the systems in Taiwan, Japan, South Korea… um… Mongolia… uh… pretty much everywhere except North korea and burma.

October 10, 2005 @ 8:19 pm | Comment

no one was killed, richard. People still debating whether or not Lu was seriously hurt.

October 10, 2005 @ 8:30 pm | Comment

Some Chinese reporter successfully contacted Lu, and he is fine and hasn’t been seriously hurt at all. The Guardian reporter exaggerates the whole thing. Chinese reporters are asking him to resign from Guardian!

October 10, 2005 @ 8:38 pm | Comment

Today’s article from the Guardian clears up some of the ambiguities: Lu was beaten, but not badly injured. The Guardian reported claims that he witnessed this, and I see no reason to disbelieve that. My guess is that yesterday’s report was written while the reporter was in a state of shock, which I suspect would be normal for anyone who had feared that they would be beaten by a mob, and that the shock contributed to the exageration. Also he never said Lu was dead, only that he “feared” Lu might be dead.
Anyway: http://www.guardian.co.uk/china/story/0,7369,1589186,00.html

October 10, 2005 @ 9:13 pm | Comment

Lin,
is it not possible that elements in the central authorities who control the news media and state security apparatus are in collusion with the party bosses in Guangdong? Is it not possible that they come from the same factional background?

October 10, 2005 @ 9:31 pm | Comment

Please forgive my poor translation. If you understand Chinese, go directly to anti’s blog

The justice cannot be done by the rumor
————by Anti
http://spaces.msn.com/members/mranti/
Please note the Guardian today continues its ” fantasy ”
This morning I got up to read Guardian, and discovered this British media should be denounced for now because of its immoral character. Ben was apparently fantasizing. If this was happened to NY times or Washington Post, after the fact had been clarified, the conduct of Ben would have been condemned for sure by colleagues. However “the Guardian” neither shut up nor sent out their apologies. Today they continue their rumors for bailing Ben out. The head of Beijing branch (Jonathan Watts) sent Guardian a report from Guangzhou
“Activist found alive after beating by mob” (http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,1589118,00.html),
in order to explain the discrepancy in the yesterday’s report:

The Guardian’s reporters are still lying to defend their earlier report with one subtitle in today’s report: “Lu Banglie injured but recovering after treatment.” Is the Guardian the only one in the world interviewing Lu Bang Lie? Yesterday many of our friends waited until 10pm to speak with Lu directly over the phone. The telephone conversation result in Guardian hatred due to their immoral reports. Some Chinese media, which has already prepared the 20000 characters special report with blood and tears according to the report from Guardian, had to completely remove the manuscript.
Treatment? A health examination in Zhijiang local hospital is called the treatment in your report? What treatment can turn a man who has his eyes and tongue popped out, his ligament in his neck broken, his body limp, twisted and his head connected to his body with a rubber band, into a person with only minor wounds in three days? Enough, Guardian! Chinese reporters are looking down upon you guys. Since long time ago, the Xinhua news agency and CCTV have been the representatives of shameless news, however the lie from Guardian, is possibly an even bigger hit to Chinese people. The majority of foreign news reporters, in reporting China, is professional, and insists to have at least two independent verifiable sources before they send out their report. They usually give out balanced reports from China. However, Guardian not only used ” I ” to lie, but also tried to cover up their shit after the lie was exposed.
The Guardian’s mistake will seriously affect Taishi incident itself and will even hurt other justified reports about Taishi. Before readers start believing the story, they would subconsciously think it’s another fantasy.
That’s why rumors not only cannot facilitate the justice, but also hinder the justice.

I always personally believe in the democracy, and fully support the democratic movement in China. But regarding to any exaggerating and deceiving report in seeking of the democracy, I would expresses my indignation based on my professionalism. I cannot allow a crazy reporter, who used to be a human shield in Iraq, ruin the dream and goal of a group of Chinese news reporters with good hearts. Although Ben is a British reporter, the UK is not a news ethic fly. You also have the Economist, BBC and the FT with higher standards. (I add one sentence here, shame on you, Ben!)

October 10, 2005 @ 9:38 pm | Comment

Somehow the blockquote didn’t show up, I have to post it again. Sorry about that

The justice cannot be done by the rumor
————by Anti
http://spaces.msn.com/members/mranti/
Please note the Guardian today continues its ” fantasy ”
This morning I got up to read Guardian, and discovered this British media should be denounced for now because of its immoral character. Ben was apparently fantasizing. If this was happened to NY times or Washington Post, after the fact had been clarified, the conduct of Ben would have been condemned for sure by colleagues. However “the Guardian” neither shut up nor sent out their apologies. Today they continue their rumors for bailing Ben out. The head of Beijing branch (Jonathan Watts) sent Guardian a report from Guangzhou
“Activist found alive after beating by mob” (http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,1589118,00.html),
in order to explain the discrepancy in the yesterday’s report:

He lay there – his eye out of its socket, his tongue cut, a stream of blood dropping from his mouth, his body limp, twisted. The ligaments in his neck were broken, so his head lay sideways as if connected to the rest of his body by a rubber band.

The Guardian’s reporters are still lying to defend their earlier report with one subtitle in today’s report: “Lu Banglie injured but recovering after treatment.” Is the Guardian the only one in the world interviewing Lu Bang Lie? Yesterday many of our friends waited until 10pm to speak with Lu directly over the phone. The telephone conversation result in Guardian hatred due to their immoral reports. Some Chinese media, which has already prepared the 20000 characters special report with blood and tears according to the report from Guardian, had to completely remove the manuscript.
Treatment? A health examination in Zhijiang local hospital is called the treatment in your report? What treatment can turn a man who has his eyes and tongue popped out, his ligament in his neck broken, his body limp, twisted and his head connected to his body with a rubber band, into a person with only minor wounds in three days? Enough, Guardian! Chinese reporters are looking down upon you guys. Since long time ago, the Xinhua news agency and CCTV have been the representatives of shameless news, however the lie from Guardian, is possibly an even bigger hit to Chinese people. The majority of foreign news reporters, in reporting China, is professional, and insists to have at least two independent verifiable sources before they send out their report. They usually give out balanced reports from China. However, Guardian not only used ” I ” to lie, but also tried to cover up their shit after the lie was exposed.
The Guardian’s mistake will seriously affect Taishi incident itself and will even hurt other justified reports about Taishi. Before readers start believing the story, they would subconsciously think it’s another fantasy.
That’s why rumors not only cannot facilitate the justice, but also hinder the justice.

I always personally believe in the democracy, and fully support the democratic movement in China. But regarding to any exaggerating and deceiving report in seeking of the democracy, I would expresses my indignation based on my professionalism. I cannot allow a crazy reporter, who used to be a human shield in Iraq, ruin the dream and goal of a group of Chinese news reporters with good hearts. Although Ben is a British reporter, the UK is not a news ethic fly. You also have the Economist, BBC and the FT with higher standards. (I add one sentence here, shame on you, Ben!)

October 10, 2005 @ 9:40 pm | Comment

I think the reporter saw him the way he described him, with his head lying at an angle. The Guardian has update the story, as the earlier comment indicates. It may be a case of bad reporting or simply of the reporter not understanding how serious or not-so-serious Lu’s condition was. But the story is not how close to death Lu was, but the fact that he was beaten. Now watch certain interested parties try to shift all the focus from the actual crime to the subject of the reporter’s alleged exaggeration.

October 10, 2005 @ 9:43 pm | Comment

dylan,
You guess is bold, but also reasonable in terms of politics in China. US Professor in Chinese politics should pull out the profile of these officials and study:)
I guess you have been studying Chinese politics for some time?

October 10, 2005 @ 9:44 pm | Comment

What was mosty striking about the story (after the horrific account laced with affecting adjectives) was the journalist’s own account of his fear, cowardice and impotence. A trained medic, at no time did he help the poor man but begged for his life. I had never read such a self-indictment in the national press.

October 10, 2005 @ 9:46 pm | Comment

Richard,
For Chinese, this kind of report could totally ruin their trust of certain western media. I still remember in 1989, VOA reported tens of thousands of students died after the massacre. I was astonished at that time even if I was just a little kid. However later I knew the death toll is in hundreds. Since then I lost the confidence in VOA. They usually just report the new number and don’t even say sorry for that.

October 10, 2005 @ 9:50 pm | Comment

Well, Keir, I tend to believe Anti, who almost never sing along with CCP.

October 10, 2005 @ 9:52 pm | Comment

Dylan is probably the most knowledgeable commenter on this blog when it comes to Chinese politics.

Keir, maybe the reporter was just scared out of his fucking mind…? If so, you have to commend him at least for his honesty and willingness to describe himself as a total coward in the face of what he saw as his imminent death. Such cowardice sucks, but in a moment like that, not everyone can rise up and be a hero.

October 10, 2005 @ 9:53 pm | Comment

Richard,

Exactly. The way this reporter described his reactions and his behaviour under perceived threat of imminent violent death, is the MAIN reason why I find him creditable.

The way he described it is exactly what it feels like, for anyone who’s ever gone through it. Everyone crumbles a bit in such a situation. I’ve been there (although not in China), so I know.

So you hit it right on the head, the main reason for his credibility.

October 10, 2005 @ 9:58 pm | Comment

Lin, we’ll see. Sometimes bad stories get printed. Even People’s Daily has posted things that weren’t true, believe it or not. But I suspect it is a case of the reporter being too close to the danger and letting himself be overcome by emotion. It’s too bad, because it will damage the credibility of the media with Chinese people, as you say. And, of course, it totally shifts the focus away from the CCP’s sins and places it on the reporter’s. How lucky for the CCP! Let’s see if they try to play it up. Anyone taking bets?

October 10, 2005 @ 10:00 pm | Comment

“He lay there – his eye out of its socket, his tongue cut, a stream of blood dropping from his mouth, his body limp, twisted. The ligaments in his neck were broken, so his head lay sideways as if connected to the rest of his body by a rubber band.
”

I think this reporter has a great potential. He could be a good candidate for US propaganda department if US decided to formally set up one. The guest writer Martyn and that Stimson fellow are also good candidates.

October 10, 2005 @ 10:13 pm | Comment

I think the reporter reported what he saw, or what he believed he saw. And maybe he screwed up. As I said, the usual suspects will now divert all the attention to the reporter, and not to the actual crime. Reporters in America exaggerated some of the brutal conditions in post-Katrina new orleans. That doesn’t mean there weren’t a lot of bad conditions, but far-right pundits seize on the bad reporting and use it to discount all allegations of abuse. It’s a clever tactic, very slick

October 10, 2005 @ 10:27 pm | Comment

Actually the only incorrect observation he made was of torn neck ligaments – which is and easy enough mistake to make in a heated moment.

All of the other injuries – the lacerations, unconsciousness etc – are all typical of a good beating.

It’s both hard AND easy to kill a man in a beating. Easy if you hit him the right (or wrong) way, but very hard to do unless you know how. So I’m not surprised that he’s not dead. Yet.

But, as for the various commenters here who are making light of this beating, I wonder how many of them have ever had the shit beat out of them? None, I wager.

October 10, 2005 @ 10:39 pm | Comment

Once I heard that this guy was still alive, I knew right away that “certain forces” would jump on this to say “oh look at the bias in the Western media” blah blah blah.
Please, give the guy a break and don’t go around celebrating the fact that Lv is “alive and well.” According to an eyewitness, it sounds like he got the royal shit beaten out of him. We haven’t seen any pictures of him, but I am assuming it wouldn’t be very pretty. On top of that, the situation in Taishi remains the same, and the fact stands that people who are trying to get in are getting beaten.
So, really, try not to use the fact that Lv is alive to support your “go China” prejudices.

October 10, 2005 @ 11:40 pm | Comment

Well, I sure as hell HOPE Lu is still alive! That’s the kind of “mistake” in reporting that one roots for.

October 11, 2005 @ 12:22 am | Comment

See why I didn’t want to touch this stroy with a big stick. I’m actually considering covering this from the angle that attacks the western media for is coverage. Too much rumor and denunciation, not enough fact.

I have not been able to confirm any deaths, or even exactly who did the beating.

This is exactly the kind of overblown story that Beijing want the Chinese people to think is the norm in the west.

I heard a report on the BBC world service that said that Lu was alive and in his home town, it said that he remembered being dragged from his car and beaten and being treaed by doctors, but nothing else. If he is well enough to have gone home less than two days after supposedly being beaten nearly to death, then he must have a super physiology. The BBC didn’t mention any deaths, or the beating of any foreigners.

Curiously, the BBC also didn’t include ANYTHING from Lu himself, not even a soundbyte, only that one of its corrispondents had spoken to him.

October 11, 2005 @ 12:57 am | Comment

You may well be right, ACB, but I suggest you wait and see before condemning the article as an example of bad journalism. No one said Lu was dead, did they? According to the reporter, he saw the beating with his own eyes. The one thing he seems to have got wrong for sure was about the ligaments in Lu’s neck being broken, but that’s forgivable if sloppy. Don’t fall into the trap the CCP is now trying to lay, steering you to focus on the journalist and not the victim. That’s what the right wing did with Dan Rather. Yeah, he fucked up, but there was still one hell of a story there about Bush’s draft dodging. But by focusing on Rather, that story soon dropped into oblivion.

October 11, 2005 @ 1:27 am | Comment