Dave at Mutant Palm, no handmaiden to the CCP, demolishes the obscenely ridiculous “conspiracy” rumors being circulated and fanned by various kooks, including Powerline and Michelle Malkin and others, claiming the attack on Jin Jing was choreographed by the CCP – all based on a photo that shows two people from opposing sides of the Tibet issue walking on the same road without trying to murder the other! Seriously. That’s what it boils down to. Dave’s fisking of this rubbish is funny, specific and devastating.
Thanks to ESWN for the tip. I don’t always see eye to eye with Roland (or anybody else) on every issue, but his coverage of this topic has been quite excellent. Be sure to check his detailed post on the “conspiracy theory,” one of his very best. And the Mutant Palm post is an absolute must-read. Go there right now. He does a great job, too, in exposing the equally irrational fenqing who have launched a witch hunt against someone they somehow think (wrongly) was the assailant. Insanity all around.
1
By Jinhan
There is much more irrationality to refute.
http://tinyurl.com/6qyk38
The invasion of the robotic thugs
The attacks on the ‘horrible, ominous, retarded’ Chinese men guarding the Olympic flame are historical prejudice repeated as farce.
April 17, 2008 @ 11:19 am | Comment
2
By richard
Jinhan, I, too, found the “robotic thugs” creepy, but that’s what body guards are supposed to be – they are there to tell people you had better not mess with them or the object of their protection. I think China was kind of dumb in not explaining to the public exactly who they were and what they were there for – they left themselves open to a lot of wild speculation. Stupid. Why are they always so stupid?
In an earlier thread I asked for one confirmed example of wrong-doing that would justify my joining the chorus in condemning them. No one came up with anything that was not from bloggers who weren’t there, or torchbearers/witnesses who were tied to the Tibet cause. It was kind of comical, seeing the “proof” that was offered up (this blogger said…this member of Free Tibet said….it was like Michelle Malkin telling her readers something is true because Dan Riehl or Charles johnson said so).
What it boiled down to was those who completely hate the Chinese government saw them as “Nazis,” those who have serious issues with the Chinese government but don’t hate them across the board (like me) saw them as icky though not unlike bodyguards at any public event, and those who adore the CCP no matter what atrocity they commit saw the gruff, rude, robotic blue-clothed cadets as demi-gods.
It is all in the eye of the beholder. The guards are whatever you want to make them out to be. You can actually predict in advance who will say what about them. As I said in the earlier thread, where we exhausted this topic, just show me exactly what they did to whom and when, not just someone’s impression of their rudeness, and if they did something bad I will tell the world how I feel. But please, see the earlier thread first so we don’t repeat the same tired conversation. Every second of the entire event was taped and photographed. Show me the evidence, and I will believe. Until then, I have to attribute the hysteria they generated to pre-conceived notions, cultural differences, poor judgment on the part of the organizers, and ingrained prejudices. And unfortunately, to those with prejudices, simply asking for definitive proof makes you one of “the bad guys.”
April 17, 2008 @ 11:40 am | Comment
3
By Jinhan
The article by O’Neill does a very good job of exposing British xenophobia and insecurity.
In the previous Olympic games, Greece sent some 80 men in military uniform to guard the flame. No one bothered to ask “who are these strange Greeks”.
It’s very hypocritical to call the 15 men in tracksuits “thugs” when it’s the 3,000 British Police beating up protesters and locking them up as the Chinese “thugs” stood aside.
April 17, 2008 @ 11:54 am | Comment
4
By Matthew Stinson
Richard, you might want to tell people to scroll up when they go to that link on ESWN, ’cause if we scroll down we get to see Roland aiding and abetting the nationalist thugs in their Internet stalking (as Tom points out).
April 17, 2008 @ 12:15 pm | Comment
5
By richard
Thanks Matthew – I fixed the link. Good point. I’ve never posted anything praising the printing of someone’s phone number, something I am firmly against.
April 17, 2008 @ 12:26 pm | Comment
6
By HongXing
Richard, you must be careful. According to nanheyangrouchuan, kevin,stuart,Raj,snow, you are just brainwashed, how can any non-brainwashed person say anything positive about China? How can that be? If you search through every post of those 5 in the history of htis blog, can you find a single post that said anything positive about China, even one? You must be brainwashed.
I’m not too worried about this. There are many things the CCP can do to deal with the Europeans on this Tibet issue (US government is already silent on this issue, cause they know when trillions of US treasury notes are dumped onto the market, it’s not a joke). First, give some economic retaliation/sanctions against France, basically punitive measures. Then, when this Gaulish chicken is de-boned, the rest of Europe will get the message.
I will say again, when you mess with the CCP, you will be fucked. Remember 1989, remember the tanks, the mixture of blood/flesh/brains on the cement of Tiananmen square after the morning after 6/4? Come on……
April 17, 2008 @ 12:53 pm | Comment
7
By Jinhan
You are a fucking disgrace to the Red Star that symbolizes everything you oppose.
April 17, 2008 @ 12:56 pm | Comment
8
By nanheyangrouchuan
Introducing the “flame squad” was a big mistake by the CCP, who still is obsessed with the idea that it knows what is best for China and now is trying to push its view of “security” on the rest of the world.
Being a PR guy, you should know better Richard.
April 17, 2008 @ 1:00 pm | Comment
9
By richard
Nanhe, I indeed said it was a mistake the way they “introduced” their goon squad, or whatever we choose to call them. Very poorly done.
April 17, 2008 @ 1:41 pm | Comment
10
By richard
I took out comments about the personal matter and am discussing it with the involved party offline.
April 17, 2008 @ 7:04 pm | Comment
11
By Tom - Daai Tou Laam
[moving the personal discussion to email]
But back to Dave’s post:
Well, even better than going to the police, he�s gone to the media, and its trickling into the Chinese forums. Unfortunately, its still in English, so the only comment response in this particular example is 看不懂 (I don�t understand).
Now if the Chinese BBS folks don’t understand the English article about the mistaken identity, then how the hell did they make the threatening phone messages in English? Makes me believe that the folks who made English-language phone calls to the victim found the phone number from an English language source. And I only know of one English-language blog/BBS proudly publishing that information.
It’s the one you proudly keep on your blogroll. What’s that about knowing people from the company they keep?
April 17, 2008 @ 7:10 pm | Comment
12
By richard
Tom, I have a pretty diverse blogroll, from John Pomfret to Richard Spencer to Sun Bin to ESWN to Jeremiah Jenne, etc. From very strong critics of the CCP to some who are more sympathetic. They are on my blogroll because I try to read them every day, not because I believe everything they say is true. I only actually keep company (through email and personal meet-ups) with about four or five of them, and they are all in the US or Beijing.
April 17, 2008 @ 7:33 pm | Comment
13
By mor
Dear Richard,
This is not about having a “diverse blogroll”, it’s also not about the quality of Roland’s ESWN website (appalling, I would say), it’s also not about what ESWN is more critical of or more sympathetic with (I don’t care). This is about publishing a person’s contact details, phone number and home address, even including a satellite photo and a picture of his home on the Internet. That would be outragious even if he was the asshole who assaulted a lady in a wheelchair, but as far as I know he’s totally innocent, he was just mistaken for another guy. And ESWN publishes his personal details for all the stalkers to find him. And you provide a link!!! So you help spreading it!!! Alarm bells are ringing, Richard!!! And you were concerned that some of your recent threads do not agree with your work ethics? Jesus Christ!!!
April 18, 2008 @ 4:18 am | Comment
14
By richard
mor, I already said I wouldn’t ever list someone’s phone number on my site. Are you saying I need to drop ESWN from my blogroll because of one post he wrote? Have you read his explanation? Now, I don’t agree with him but I also don’t equate what he did under this circumstance with mass murder or even petty larceny, just to poor judgment. I put on my blogroll the blogs I read. No matter what you have to say about any of them, and no matter how many questionable things some of these bloggers may have done in the past, if I read them and find them worth reading they go on my blogroll. Andrew Sullivan, once the most aggressive proponent of the Iraq War, is on my blogroll. These bloggers are more than a single post. If you think Roland should be burned at the stake, fine. His site is still important, and whether I agree or disagree with him I’m going to read hi every day because, like it or not, he’s the most influential English-language blogger in Greater China and I want to know what he’s saying. Please don’t get too carried away. My putting someone on the blogroll, again, doesn’t mean I endorse everything they say. Not at all. I remember a big storm in a teacup when one blogger was deleting from her blogroll every blogger who linked to Gweilo Diaries because he posted girlie pics. So stupid, to make a big deal out of someone’s personal selected reading list. If I linked to stormfront or freerepublic I could see some alarm. Roland is on the blogroll of literally every intelligent blogger I know. Maybe he screwed up, but he’s an important voice and a great resource (go look at how, since 2003, many of my posts came via Roland; same with most of the bloggers here).
April 18, 2008 @ 10:11 am | Comment
15
By mor
[Question: Should the information about Lobsang Gendun be published here? This is the same as asking whether one wants to bury one’s head in the sand. Go to either Google or Baidu, type in “Lobsang Gendun” and this information will pop up anyway. The purpose of this post is not to communicate the information per se. Rather, this is an illustration of power of the human flesh search engines of China. For a similar story, see Fallout from the Free Tibet protests by John Kennedy, Global Voices Online; New Freedom, and Peril, in Online Criticism of China by Ariana Eunjung Cha and Jill Drew, Washington Post; Chinese Student in U.S. Is Caught in Confrontation Shaila Dewan, New York Times.]
I guess you are talking about this “explanation”? Now I tried Google and guess what? The first website I found that provided address, phone number, e-mail and photos was – ESWN. But that’s besides the point. “Others are already doing it, so me doing it wouldn’t make a difference”, what a lame ridiculous excuse is that?
Nobody was talking about mass murder, please give me a break! I didn’t call Roland a criminal at all. As a matter of fact, I don’t know if you break a law when you publish a person’s home address and contact details without that person’s consent. But I do know that it’s plain wrong!
Once more, Richard, this is not about what you like to read or whom you find excellent. If Roland likes to spend his time translating gems like this:
“The arrogance of the Germans astonished me time and again. I am only twenty years old and I can see the shadow of the German people from sixty years ago. They are the descendants of the Nazis. Nazi blood will flow through their bodies forever. What they regard as their correct insistence looks rigid to others, even very terrifying.”
that’s up to him. And if others like to read that sort of stuff that’s up to them. This is about virtually throwing somebody (who in all likeliness didn’t even do what he is accused of) to the mob. And I’m also not only talking about ESWN being on your blogroll, but about the link you provide at the beginning of this thread. I found all the information I’m talking about through your link to ESWN, and I might not be the only one.
“Roland should be burned at the stake, fine.”
I never said that, Richard. Your argumentation becomes more and more similar to that of certain people, you’ve been complaining about not too long ago.
“His site is still important, and whether I agree or disagree with him I’m going to read hi every day because, like it or not, he’s the most influential English-language blogger in Greater China and I want to know what he’s saying.”
I don’t care what he is or who he is, even if he is the most influential blogger of the whole cyberspace that doesn’t give him the right to expose somebody’s home address. As a matter of fact, being an influential blogger should go hand in hand with a certain sense of responsibility.
“Please don’t get too carried away.”
I guess you’ve never been at the receiving end of murder threats and telephone terror. Believe me, even a bunch of stupid kids who only want to have some fun can seriously screw up your life.
April 19, 2008 @ 2:37 am | Comment