For people in United States, I created a Google form to collect names of those interested in buying a copy.
See the numbers of copies ordered so far.
Sunday, February 26, 2012
Sunday, February 19, 2012
台灣人 挺扁反扁大戰
最近在 [I Love Taiwan] Google group 上爆發了 挺扁反扁大論戰. 這不是台灣人 挺扁反扁的第一次大戰爭, 也絕不會是最後一次.
從挺字看, 挺扁的人應該注重阿扁的人權. 所以挺扁者的敵人應是用司法迫害阿扁的中國國民黨, 馬英九和蔡守訓. 可是, 我很少看到挺扁的人批判中國國民黨, 施明德, 馬英九或蔡守訓, 卻永遠看他們和其他台灣人鬥個不休. 這不是很奇怪嗎? 敵人是馬英九和蔡守訓, 為什麼找自己的同志算帳?
這裏是一個支持阿扁的好機會. 請你用幾秒鐘的時間連署 Demand immediate release of former President Chen (立即釋放陳水扁).
從 2008-11-11 到今天, 中國國民黨已經把阿扁關了 1,195 天. 中國國民黨 不須要, 也談不上反對生殺由它的階下囚阿扁. 他們能做的是繼續凌辱和迫害扁和他的家族. 可見, 2008 年起, 反扁並不包括中國國民黨人.
今天, 反扁者是: 被認為不挺扁的台灣人. 挺扁, 反扁是中國國民黨 把台灣人一分為二, 讓台灣人長期內鬥的聰明洗腦法.
台灣人的共同敵人是中國國民黨. 請把你的精神用在消滅中國國民黨黨產, 消滅不公平的司法和選舉.
台灣人聚精會神地內鬥,
中國國民黨也正全副精神 加速消滅台灣人.
從挺字看, 挺扁的人應該注重阿扁的人權. 所以挺扁者的敵人應是用司法迫害阿扁的中國國民黨, 馬英九和蔡守訓. 可是, 我很少看到挺扁的人批判中國國民黨, 施明德, 馬英九或蔡守訓, 卻永遠看他們和其他台灣人鬥個不休. 這不是很奇怪嗎? 敵人是馬英九和蔡守訓, 為什麼找自己的同志算帳?
這裏是一個支持阿扁的好機會. 請你用幾秒鐘的時間連署 Demand immediate release of former President Chen (立即釋放陳水扁).
從 2008-11-11 到今天, 中國國民黨已經把阿扁關了 1,195 天. 中國國民黨 不須要, 也談不上反對生殺由它的階下囚阿扁. 他們能做的是繼續凌辱和迫害扁和他的家族. 可見, 2008 年起, 反扁並不包括中國國民黨人.
今天, 反扁者是: 被認為不挺扁的台灣人. 挺扁, 反扁是中國國民黨 把台灣人一分為二, 讓台灣人長期內鬥的聰明洗腦法.
台灣人的共同敵人是中國國民黨. 請把你的精神用在消滅中國國民黨黨產, 消滅不公平的司法和選舉.
台灣人聚精會神地內鬥,
中國國民黨也正全副精神 加速消滅台灣人.
Friday, February 17, 2012
Obama will sacrifice Taiwanese for bucks
Here is a proof II
"去年底，檢調還在掃蕩「瘦肉精」，將「違法業者」移送法辦，現在農委會卻鼓吹「培林」無害"
反對瘦肉精 雲林豬業：養鴨養雞都抗議
2012年02月14日19:20 蘋果即時農委會畜牧處副處長李春進，今天下午到雲林與養豬業代表溝通，
養豬業者表示，不滿上周五農委會開的會議，竟然只邀請贊同瘦肉精
養豬業者表示，不滿上周五農委會開的會議，竟然只邀請贊同瘦肉精
Thursday, February 16, 2012
Obama will sacrifice Taiwanese for bucks
Here is a proof
Did the US intervene with Taiwan’s elections?
Andy Chang
The presidential and parliamentary elections held in Taiwan on January 14th were unusual. A retired US diplomat Douglas H. Paal publicly endorsed the incumbent president on a Cti News TV interview. Furthermore, his support was based on the unfounded concept of “92 Consensus.” Ma Ying-jeou and China’s Hu Jintao claim there was a 92 Consensus, but there is no written document to prove any such consensus.
On January 12th, two days before the election, Douglas H. Paal, the former director of the American Institute in Taiwan (AIT), pointed out during an interview with cable TV channel Cti News that Ma Ying-jeou’s claim of “1992 Consensus is false” as it is does exist. However, Paal later said that this consensus was “the only basis for cross-strait talks.”
This is a cunning attempt to make China’s “One China principle” become existing consensus between China’s PRC and Taiwan’s ROC. Paal not only endorsed Ma, but also betrayed the US policy to maintain status quo. Paal was speaking as if he is a spokesman of China to claim that Taiwan is a part of China.
Paal also denounced candidate Tsai Ing-wen’s proposal of “Taiwan consensus” as “fiction.” Paal said Tsai’s cross straight policy is “a word game” that her proposal of Taiwan Consensus “vague and unpractical.” Paal further speculated that “If elected, Tsai might call for Taiwan’s independence” and “Tsai’s messages were too big to make Washington comfortable:”
A hired gun from America, or a covert US intervention
Paal served as the director of the American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) from 2003 to 2006. The director’s post is a presidential appointee (equivalent to an ambassador) whose duty was to maintain good relationship between the United States and Taiwan’s ROC. This time he flew to Taiwan to endorse Ma and also publicly supported the non-existent 92 Consensus.
Evidently Paal played the role of a “hired gun” from America in Taiwan’s election. The question is whether this was a covert attempt by the US to intervene with Taiwan’s election.
President Obama repeatedly stressed that the United States should not and will not interfere with the democratic elections of leaders in other nations. But it is hard to believe that a former AIT director would travel to Taiwan and blatantly interfere with Taiwan’s election without the knowledge of the White House. Although the current AIT director William A. Stanton declared Paal’s opinion does not represent that of the United States, most of people think it is “a good cop, bad cop” play. It is hard to believe that a former director came to intervene with Taiwan’s election but the current director was not debriefed.
“92 Consensus” and “Taiwan Consensus”
The 1992 Consensus or Consensus of 1992 is a term describing the outcome of a meeting in 1992 between the semi-official representatives of the People's Republic of China (PRC) in mainland China and the Republic of China (ROC) in Taiwan. The Consensus, as described by observers, is that, on the subject of the “One China principle”, both sides recognize there is only one China - both mainland China and Taiwan belong to the same China, but both sides could not agree on the meaning of one China.
PRC insisted that one China was PRC, and the ROC insisted that one China was ROC; so the meeting ended without any consensus or agreement. The subject did not come up until 2011, when Hu Jintao threatened the ROC that the cross straight relationship would cool down if Ma did not recognize 92 Consensus is One China principle. Ma brought up the subject in the election as a necessary condition to maintain Sino-Taiwan relationship, and Douglas Paal broadcasted it as a “false…. but the only basis.”
Taiwanese are alarmed because if accepting 92 Consensus equal One-China principle and one China is PRC, Taiwan will be “unified” by PRC in the future. Tsai proposed a “Taiwan consensus” which stated that Taiwan’s future must be determined by all Taiwanese. Taiwanese self determination of their future is a fundamental democratic principle, but Paal denounced it as “vague and unpractical.”
Status Quo must support the welfare of Taiwanese
Although China insists Taiwan is part of China, the majority (89%) of Taiwanese insist Taiwan is not part of China. Taiwan is not a country. The United States does not recognize ROC and does not recognize Taiwan as part of China. In other words, based on the Taiwan Relations Act, the United States supports “the people of Taiwan”, not the government of ROC. Ma Ying-jeou falsely claimed that 92 Consensus existed, but Taiwanese people do not agree that the 92 Consensus or the One China Principle ever existed.
Taiwan Relations Act of April 10, 1979 (TRA) states that “to promote the foreign policy of the United States by authorizing the continuation of commercial, cultural, and other relations between the people of the United States and the people of Taiwan.” In other words, the United States supports “the people of Taiwan”, not the ROC.
Mr. Paal intervened with the ROC elections and supported the ROC to rule the people of Taiwan. Although TRA states the United States will support the people of Taiwan, Mr. Paal endorsed a Chinese candidate Ma Ying-jeou to rule the people of Taiwan, to maintain Status Quo between China and Taiwan.
This is morally and politically wrong. The United States must support the welfare of Taiwanese people. The United States must understand that a status quo is a temporary peace but also a gradual encroachment of Taiwan. Ma Ying jeou’s cross straight talk with China without a formal Taiwan Consensus will result in losing Taiwan.
If Taiwan is lost to China, it would be a disaster to the humanity and democracy. Also, losing Taiwan to China also means the US will lose a strategic stronghold in West Pacific.
Andre C. Chang、Ph.D.
San Clemente, CA
Wednesday, January 11, 2012
投中國國民黨就是自我閹割
林保華呼籲台灣人不做太監
台灣人真奇怪. 他們票選中國國民黨的總統和立法委員來永遠剝奪台灣人的公投權及公平的司法人權.
| 台灣人拒做太監！ ◎林保華 |
列印 Facebook  Twitter |
| 中國老百姓對台灣的大選有何感想？一位中國網友在看了台灣總統辯論後說：「像是太監看春宮圖，興奮，卻無奈。」這句名言，被廣泛引用，包括香港的《爭鳴》、《亞洲周刊》等雜誌。這是台灣民主的成果，台灣只要保住這個成果，就會感染中國人，促使中國改變。 遺憾的是，馬英九對中國只談統一，不談民主；發動他影響下的媒體與司法等政府機構介入大選，嚴重傷害了台灣的民主成果，顯現威權幽靈的回潮。尤其司 法的表現最為囂張，一刀刀切割其獨立性，不但針對綠營人士，也恐嚇金馬集團以外的藍營人士，例如最近披露出來的張碩文、傅＊（左山右昆）萁及他們的家人。 因此這場台灣大選，是台灣人是不是做太監的選舉。馬英九願意做共產黨的太監，我們沒有意見，但是台灣人絕對不願意做馬英九這個台灣太監總管旗下的太 監。香港已經被綁到「刑場」正在施刑；台灣則正在被綁，只有蔡英文當選、綠營立委過半，台灣才可能擺脫被綑綁閹割的命運。而這個綑綁的繩索，叫做「九二共 識」；中國不但自己，還通過馬英九強迫蔡英文接受這個繩索，也動員台商搖旗吶喊。但是我相信，聰明的台商自己明白，如果台灣人成為共產黨的太監，他們也將 失去統戰的優待而淪為太監。 馬英九當選，不但是台灣人淪為太監的問題。我們看看五都選舉時，連勝文槍擊案扭轉選情後，國民黨的當選人立即舊病復發：胡志強不肯向台中縣民謝票， 以回敬他在台中縣的失利，然而他連支持他的選民也不謝，顯然有族群意識與階級意識作怪。郝龍斌則忙著出國「考察」，連他的副市長也在紐西蘭因為地震被震出 而曝光，據說也在考察，卻未見有隨行人員。即使朱立倫，作為國民黨「明日之星」，他在新北市的施政成績也排在民進黨施政縣市的後面，遑論郝龍斌的台北市與 胡志強的台中市。而馬英九根本忘記執政，為選舉而不擇手段，包括揮霍民脂民膏，不顧嗷嗷待哺的勞苦大眾；因此能相信他續任的承諾嗎？ 這不但見證五個市縣的「綠色執政，品質保證」，五都選舉時沒有投票給民進黨的選民，更不應該忘記那個槍擊案，因而在這次大選中還民進黨一個公道，還自己一個公道；讓台灣在重生的民進黨領導下，實現台灣大團結、大聯合而展翅飛翔。 台灣人拒做太監，台灣人要有尊嚴的活著。國民黨內有台灣心的政治人物，例如王院長、廖秘書長等，你們沒有口出惡言，挑動台灣的分裂，台灣人民會記住這一點，願大家為保有台灣的尊嚴，共同努力。（作者林保華為資深時事評論員，http://blog.pixnet.net/LingFengComment） |
Sunday, January 8, 2012
2012-01-14: 除三害, 使台灣變成一個正常的文明國家
第一害: 馬英九
第三害: 所有不公不義的司法人員
第二害: 所有中國國民黨籍的立法委員
人民用選票消滅了這二害後,
新總統和國會才能夠幫我們除
第三害: 所有不公不義的司法人員
Saturday, November 12, 2011
It is OK to sell Taiwan to save America
Taiwanese are sub-humans; how else could they support a man like Ma Ying-Jeou?
To Save Our Economy, Ditch Taiwan
New York Times
Here is one: He should enter into closed-door negotiations with Chinese leaders to write off the $1.14 trillion of American debt currently held by China in exchange for a deal to end American military assistance and arms sales to Taiwan and terminate ...
Is This NYT Op-Ed a Joke? Selling Taiwan to the Bankers of Beijing
The Atlantic
America owes China a lot of money; officials in Beijing are always mad at officials in Washington for selling weapons to Taiwan. Presto! Let's solve both problems at once, writing off the debt in exchange for writing off Taiwan. ...
The Atlantic
America owes China a lot of money; officials in Beijing are always mad at officials in Washington for selling weapons to Taiwan. Presto! Let's solve both problems at once, writing off the debt in exchange for writing off Taiwan. ...
=====
Today, America has little strategic interest in Taiwan, which is gradually integrating with China economically by investing in and forming joint ventures with mainland Chinese firms. The island’s absorption into mainland China is inevitable.
OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR
To Save Our Economy, Ditch Taiwan
By PAUL V. KANE
Published: November 10, 2011
WITH a single bold act, President Obama could correct the country’s course, help assure his re-election, and preserve our children’s future.
He needs to redefine America’s mindset about national security away from the old defense mentality that American power derives predominantly from our military might, rather than from the strength, agility and competitiveness of our economy. He should make it clear that today American jobs and wealth matter more than military prowess.
As Adm. Mike Mullen, then chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, declared last year, “The most significant threat to our national security is our debt.”
There are dozens of initiatives President Obama could undertake to strengthen our economic security. Here is one: He should enter into closed-door negotiations with Chinese leaders to write off the $1.14 trillion of American debt currently held by China in exchange for a deal to end American military assistance and arms sales to Taiwan and terminate the current United States-Taiwan defense arrangement by 2015.
This would be a most precious prize to the cautious men in Beijing, one they would give dearly to achieve. After all, our relationship with Taiwan, as revised in 1979, is a vestige of the cold war.
Today, America has little strategic interest in Taiwan, which is gradually integrating with China economically by investing in and forming joint ventures with mainland Chinese firms. The island’s absorption into mainland China is inevitable.
But the status quo is dangerous; if Taiwanese nationalist politicians decided to declare independence or if Beijing’s hawks tired of waiting for integration and moved to take Taiwan by force, America could suddenly be drawn into a multitrillion-dollar war.
There will be “China hawks” who denounce any deal on Taiwan as American capitulation, but their fear of a Red China menacing Asia is anachronistic. Portraying the United States as a democratic Athens threatened by China’s autocratic Sparta makes for sensational imagery, but nothing could be further from reality.
The battle today is between competing balance sheets, and it is fought in board rooms; it is not a geopolitical struggle to militarily or ideologically “dominate” the Pacific.
In fact, China and the United States have interlocking economic interests. China’s greatest military asset is actually the United States Navy, which keeps the sea lanes safe for China’s resources and products to flow freely.
China would want a deal on Taiwan for several reasons. First, Taiwan is Beijing’s unspoken but hard-to-hide top priority for symbolic and strategic reasons; only access to water and energy mean more to Chinese leaders.
Second, a deal would open a clearer path for the gradual, orderly integration of Taiwan into China.
Third, it would undermine hard-line militarists who use the Taiwan issue to stoke nationalist flames, sideline pro-Western technocrats and extract larger military budgets. And finally, it would save China the considerable sums it has been spending on a vast military buildup.
Jeffrey Lewis, an East Asia expert at the Monterey Institute of International Studies, estimated that one-fourth to one-third of China’s defense spending goes to forces in the vicinity of Taiwan — at a cost of $30 billion to $50 billion a year. A deal for the resolution of Taiwan’s status could save China $500 billion in defense spending by 2020 and allow Beijing to break even by 2030, while reducing America’s debt and serving our broader economic interests.
The Chinese leadership would be startled — for a change — if the United States were to adopt such a savvy negotiating posture. Beyond reducing our debt, a Taiwan deal could pressure Beijing to end its political and economic support for pariah states like Iran, North Korea and Syria and to exert a moderating influence over an unstable Pakistan. It would be a game changer.
The deal would eliminate almost 10 percent of our national debt without raising taxes or cutting spending; it would redirect American foreign policy away from dated cold-war-era entanglements and toward our contemporary economic and strategic interests; and it would eliminate the risk of involvement in a costly war with China.
Critics will call this proposal impractical, even absurd. They will say it doesn’t have a prayer of passing Congress, and doesn’t acknowledge political realities. They might be right — today.
But by pursuing this agenda, Mr. Obama would change the calculus and political reality. And Congress should see a deal with China as an opportunity to make itself credible again.
Debt is not in itself bad, when managed, but today’s unsustainable debt will suffocate our economy, our democracy and our children’s futures.
By tackling the issue of Taiwan, Mr. Obama could address much of what ails him today, sending a message of bold foreign policy thinking and fiscal responsibility that would benefit every citizen and be understood by every voter.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)