担心民族主义失控，胡锦涛下令严禁学生参与示威

[labour]

胡锦涛下令严禁学生参与示威


这句话明显失实，我就在国内，我还正是大学生，从来没有没有这样的事情。。
我知道在别国什么样的网站都能访问，在国内可不行，我连来这里都是用无界上的，建议LZ还是少上那些在国内来说属于“反动”或者别的什么被大陆禁掉的网站，我不能说他们都是胡说八道，但是很大一部分真的是扭曲事实，比如你说的这个，作为国内的一名大学生，我确切的告诉你没有这种说法

"作为国内的一名大学生", 你能证明胡锦涛说过或者没说过什么？你真是个人物。

 

[labour]

I can't believe that such unresponsible news can be spreaded. It's so obvious lie.

６４期间，确实发生过军队向建国门外的外交公寓开枪的事情。

 

[jackleelee]

To ROChineseCanuck:

我知道你想说的话, 但是在这场地缘政治的游戏中, 台湾和中国完的规则根本不同.
台湾在政治,经济,军事,外交完全依赖美国， 美国随便几个对冲基金就能把整个台湾搞垮。

不是连台积电都卖给Carlyle了么？怎么能不卖？贴牌的订单都是TI, Intel, Atmel...，生产出来的又都是卖给美国， 不过就是一块肥肉在嘴上舔舔， 肉是美国产的， 最后还是美国人吃。 这些东西我可以和你说通宵， 我不跟你在这里费口舌了。

作为中国人， 我们心里很清楚所面临的困难， 前面要走的路。 复杂多变， 困难重重的国际环境，我们很坚定的为中国这座大厦打基础。 960万平方公里的土地和13亿的人口， 这就是我们的本钱。 我们离了美国人照样活， 台湾敢这么讲么？ 现在不是30年前了， 放弃了共产主义的计划经济，我们也在搞市场经济。

说到一党执政， 它有它的弊端，这毫无疑问。 但是中国要是搞台湾那种民主，明天就选出一个华尔街和华盛顿扶植的政府， 然后肢解中国， 最后一块一块吃掉，所有华人同文同种都永远做奴隶。 不要以为到了那个时候台湾还有什么好果子吃， 唇亡齿寒。 今天美国人扶植你们就是为了牵制中国， 到那个时候中国被肢解了， 大家都一块儿被美国支配。

不用给我回复了， 大家背景不同说不到一块儿的。

 

[ROChineseCanuck]

夏蟲不可語冰

【夏蟲不可語冰】

漁 禾 (gulu)2008/03/16 14:09

​

[FONT=新細明體][FONT=新細明體]Sun Mar 16, [/FONT][FONT=新細明體]1:42 AM ET[/FONT][/FONT][FONT=新細明體](AFP)[/FONT]

拉薩暴動新聞引起國際媒體的關注及兩岸讀者廣泛的討論，看了幾篇討論的文章之後，令人覺得：夏蟲不可語冰，沒嚐過自由民主的中國同胞，與不曾嚐過爭取自由民主辛苦歷程的台灣新生代，同樣無法體會自由民主的真諦與可貴。 ​

[FONT=新細明體]
[FONT=新細明體]今日的拉薩暴動與多年前的天安門事件，也同時令人無法想像自由台灣被逼接受「一個中國」的可能後果！[/FONT]
[FONT=新細明體]http://blog.udn.com/gulu/1699661[/FONT][/FONT]

".....private-owned newspaper in the free, legitimate, and constitutional democratic region of the Republic of China....." Too simple, sometime naive.

 

[夜色]

To one who did not have the fortune of living in such an environment, it is what ice is to a summer insect.

I see you have stooped low enough to use the "you don't understand" argument. Very powerful argument indeed, must make yourself feel tons more superior than the rest of us who "did not have the fortune of living in such an environment"... o wait, Canada's the kind of democratic country you like last time I checked.

As for your comments on 中国时报 and its subscribers, well I suppose before this whole Tibet incident you could very well substitute 中国时报 with CNN or Der Speigl and replace Taiwan with their respective countries. However, whether "... readers and subscribers are well educated, well informed, and enjoy full modern political freedom, and are therefore perfectly aware of the authenticity or otherwise of <insert Media name>'s news reports" is highly situational as was shown in the recent events regarding Tibet, and being a "... private-owned newspaper in the free, legitimate, and constitutional democratic region" does not mean it does not carry political overtones with which others could agree or disagree with. With the case of 中国时报, I think it's fairly prudent to say that they like to, at least, exaggerate things a bit, in the negative way of course, with news regarding mainland China, and it does cater to people like you very well, who likes to think himself as "well educated, well informed and enjoying full modern political freedom".
One thing though, using condescending tones and belittling others about how they are uneducated and don't understand something does very little good, so unless you are here to brag, I don't see how your actions serve any purpose other than causing more left-wing sentiments, but of course, that may just be what you want to see.

 

[ROChineseCanuck]

Do show me where I used the "you don't understand" rhetoric please. I am open to people pointing out that I have bad memory.
I cannot help to think that you are merely trying to show other netters that you are knowlegeable about such names as CNN or Der Spiegel.
But then, you cannot be blamed for not knowing that I don't have a TV connection to have anything to do with CNN, and that my knowledge of the German language is so limited that I am not sure I know the meaning of the very words Der Spiegel.
Ah, very interesting labels. I guess next time we just might see such words as bolsheviks, Trotskyists, or plaiin "petit-bourgeois ignorance" coming out from the you-know-which party "theoretician". I don't want to sin again in belittling you into just a you-know-which party foreign propanda apparatchik.

I see you have stooped low enough to use the "you don't understand" argument. Very powerful argument indeed, must make yourself feel tons more superior than the rest of us who "did not have the fortune of living in such an environment"... o wait, Canada's the kind of democratic country you like last time I checked.
I have a feeling you are over-complementing my involvement in this forum as a well organized agi-prop agent of a certain player. Well, I do not want to disappoint you by telling you that you must be projecting your own image on my humble person.

As for your comments on 中国时报 and its subscribers, well I suppose before this whole Tibet incident you could very well substitute 中国时报 with CNN or Der Speigl and replace Taiwan with their respective countries. However, whether "... readers and subscribers are well educated, well informed, and enjoy full modern political freedom, and are therefore perfectly aware of the authenticity or otherwise of <insert Media name>'s news reports" is highly situational as was shown in the recent events regarding Tibet, and being a "... private-owned newspaper in the free, legitimate, and constitutional democratic region" does not mean it does not carry political overtones with which others could agree or disagree with. With the case of 中国时报, I think it's fairly prudent to say that they like to, at least, exaggerate things a bit, in the negative way of course, with news regarding mainland China, and it does cater to people like you very well, who likes to think himself as "well educated, well informed and enjoying full modern political freedom".
One thing though, using condescending tones and belittling others about how they are uneducated and don't understand something does very little good, so unless you are here to brag, I don't see how your actions serve any purpose other than causing more left-wing sentiments, but of course, that may just be what you want to see.

 

[ROChineseCanuck]

就請你告訴大家俺想說什麼吧!
連俺都很想知道。

To ROChineseCanuck:

我知道你想说的话, 但是在这场地缘政治的游戏中, 台湾和中国完的规则根本不同.
台湾在政治,经济,军事,外交完全依赖美国， 美国随便几个对冲基金就能把整个台湾搞垮。

不是连台积电都卖给Carlyle了么？怎么能不卖？贴牌的订单都是TI, Intel, Atmel...，生产出来的又都是卖给美国， 不过就是一块肥肉在嘴上舔舔， 肉是美国产的， 最后还是美国人吃。 这些东西我可以和你说通宵， 我不跟你在这里费口舌了。

作为中国人， 我们心里很清楚所面临的困难， 前面要走的路。 复杂多变， 困难重重的国际环境，我们很坚定的为中国这座大厦打基础。 960万平方公里的土地和13亿的人口， 这就是我们的本钱。 我们离了美国人照样活， 台湾敢这么讲么？ 现在不是30年前了， 放弃了共产主义的计划经济，我们也在搞市场经济。

说到一党执政， 它有它的弊端，这毫无疑问。 但是中国要是搞台湾那种民主，明天就选出一个华尔街和华盛顿扶植的政府， 然后肢解中国， 最后一块一块吃掉，所有华人同文同种都永远做奴隶。 不要以为到了那个时候台湾还有什么好果子吃， 唇亡齿寒。 今天美国人扶植你们就是为了牵制中国， 到那个时候中国被肢解了， 大家都一块儿被美国支配。

不用给我回复了， 大家背景不同说不到一块儿的。

 

[ROChineseCanuck]

咦? 台灣不是中國的一部份嗎?

在这场地缘政治的游戏中, 台湾和中国完的规则根本不同.

 

[ROChineseCanuck]

要不要讓大家欣賞你的眼力?
告訴大家 ".....private-owned newspaper in the free, legitimate, and constitutional democratic region of the Republic of China....." 是如何地並沒有那麼單純和到底有如何地高深莫測法。

".....private-owned newspaper in the free, legitimate, and constitutional democratic region of the Republic of China....." Too simple, sometime naive.

 

[夜色]

Do show me where I used the "you don't understand" rhetoric please. I am open to people pointing out that I have bad memory.
I cannot help to think that you are merely trying to show other netters that you are knowlegeable about such names as CNN or Der Spiegel.
But then, you cannot be blamed for not knowing that I don't have a TV connection to have anything to do with CNN, and that my knowledge of the German language is so limited that I am not sure I know the meaning of the very words Der Spiegel.
Ah, very interesting labels. I guess next time we just might see such words as bolsheviks, Trotskyists, or plaiin "petit-bourgeois ignorance" coming out from the you-know-which party "theoretician". I don't want to sin again in belittling you into just a you-know-which party foreign propanda apparatchik.

Hmm, why try to deny what you said? "夏虫不可语冰"... I wonder what you could possibly mean by that, other than to call people who disagree with radical democratization "夏虫" who has no eligibility to talk about “冰”。

Regarding the CNN/Der Spiegel comment, no, I wasn't getting at how knowledgeable I was regarding these medias - in fact I'm not, so I'm sorry if you misunderstood. The point I was getting at, is that both of these boast of a well-educated and well-informed audience, just like how you were suggesting that anyone who reads 中国时报 is as such. Statements, or proclamations such as these reeking with a sense of superiority, with the implication that anyone who says the paper is politically inclined in a certain direction must be uneducated, and incapable of critical thinking. I'm sorry, but that is how I interpreted your declarations, and I can't say I like your boastful attitude.

Finally, regarding labels... um, I'm not really sure what I labeled you with, other than suggesting that your tone was condescending and offensive, and serves little purpose other than self-entertainment. I most certainly wasn't planning on calling you with any of the labels you suggested, in fact I think it's fair to say that you labeled me as a "party theoretician" when it happens that my ideals partly coincide with the current working policies.You can be sure that I do not take well to it, so much for you effort to refrain from "belittling". Nonetheless, you are free to say what you will, and I say what I would. I think that your fervor to promote democracy is very much like how Communism was promoted back in the Red times, when any opposing idea is instantly bashed without second thought. Having read through many accounts about the cultural revolution, I think it's clear that most Chinese would wish to avoid such outright fanaticism, no matter how righteous it sounds. If you don't give a damn about China, well, I suppose there's really not much point talking with you, but if you do, I really hope that you could reexamine your approach, and try to stay away from the very act of labeling that you so despise.

 

[jackleelee]

ROChineseCanuck:
一个台湾人跟我讲说台湾的政界都是一群哗众取宠的政客在台前演戏, 台后什么五大家族做真正决策. 什么旧五大家族, 新五大家族. 诸如鹿港辜家, 高雄陈家，板桥林家....
我记不得全部了.
所谓private-owned newspaper， 企业， 政客无非是这些豪门财团的一些台前代言...
这些都是你们台湾内部的事情， 我也无从考证。
你不妨给我介绍介绍...