Let’s give terrorists the Nobel Prize

There is a WSJ article by Mr. Hugo Restall,

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204908604574334482235596544.html

China’s public enemy: The alleged instigator of the Uighur riots doesn’t talk like a terrorist. Demonizing her may backfire on Beijing.

First of all, this article seems like the one I saw before about the Dalai Lama who was responsible for the Tibet riot with dozens of innocent bystanded murdered by terrorists. Again, there was an article saying that China shouldn’t accuse the Dala Lama being responsible for it would backfire. etc.  I sure didn’t see demonizing Bin Laden backfiring on Washington.

In fact, let’s compare Kadeer with Bin Laden.

You can see the parallels here very well.

1. China accused Kadeer master-minded the terroristic attack that killed almost 200 people and injured thousands.

USA accused Bin Laden master-minded the 911 attack that killed thousands.

2. Kadeer denied accusation and according to this article “she doesn’t talk like a terrorist”. Very convincing! Bravo.

Bin Laden doesn’t talk like a terrorist either.

3. Kadeer is a Muslim extremist who want to carve a chunk of land within China for her dream of Islam country.

Bin Laden wants to kick white man out of Middle east and want to enforce Islamic rules on all the land Muslims lived on

4. Kadeer financed terroristic organizations which are recognized by the UN. These terrorists have murdered hundreds of people in the most brutal and barbaric ways, including burning and beheading.

You can see the parallels here on how Bin Laden kills people.

The list goes on and on and I don’t want to bore you.

But the differences are there too.

USA sees Bin Laden as enemy of the world and advocate everyone to rise against Islamic terrorist.

But wait!. USA doesn’t want anyone to go against terrorists who are killing Chinese. Why is that? Isn’t terrorists just terrorists?

It appears to me that the White Man here distinguishes the bad terrorists from the GOOD terrorists.

The Good terrorists are those who murders anyone but the Americans and their friends while the BAD terrorists just kills anyone including Americans.

You see, unfortunately, no matter how smart the scheme is. Let’s put aside the evilness of the scheme is that good terrorists eventually turns bad.

Just like Bin Laden shook the hands of Rumsfeld before. Hussein was once a friend of USA as well. Both turned bad and one of them spetacularlly bad.

Advertisements

5 Comments

Filed under China

5 responses to “Let’s give terrorists the Nobel Prize

  1. terminatorii

    As always, you can only find truth in the comments of those WSJ articles. Those WSJ articles only speak lies.

  2. terminatorii

    For example, a comment from David Wang:

    “The author reports the issue by believeing in one-sided hearing-saying without doing any real sense research on the subject. Some issues claimed are simply fale by a little sense of judgement.

    Don’t say I am a nationalist for objecting your report and the people-like; I am a west-educated pro dem Chinese having lived in UK and HK for many years. In 1980s, in order to study abroad thus to have a better career future, I tried very hard to learn English; I sent my little girls to English school and it is more or less like me in many families of China. Would you call this as a culture genocide?

    Read a little about Xiangjiang histroy. Uighurs as a tribe were formed by a mixture of different groups of people and it happened only in the medium history (roughly though Tan to Mongo). However, Han people had administrated and lived in the area for thousands years, earlier than the formation of Uighurs. So, don’t claim Xingjiang is the homeland of Uighurs excluding Han.

    It is the basic human right that people in a country can move around to live for jobs or biz or whatsoever. Wouldn’t it ridiculous to expect to limit Han in the central area while all other people are allowed to freely move in the country; otherwise will you call it Han occupation?

    I don’t like CCP regime and think its policies towards minorities may need to be scrutinized. However, no matter we like it or not, we should not meddle things up by supporting anything against CCP or accusing anything of CCP.

    In fact, CCP has long executed policies in favor of minorities by which Han are actually discriminated, which CCP propagandaed it as for the “unity and harmony of Chinese family’. This tells the reason why CCP felt their feelings are badly hurted when something like Xingjiang and Tibetan happened.

    It seems all the problems come from the regime which is called Communist or one party rule. Yes, we know the regime is not good and it is lack of democracy and it should be changed over time, but we do not agree to object it for whatesoever dissidents claimed. I believe people like me in China represent a majority force so China will be stable and continue to rise for many years to go.

    Lastly, I do not think CCP is a Communist anymore, just as James Rogers said “China is probably the best capitalist country in the world”. Agreeing it or not and whatever the regime is, the current China regime suits for the current situation of the Chinese people. We expect an evolution within the CCP’s regime, not a revolutionary turmoil.

    From the open-up of China in late 1970s, China has been learning West very hard in most times of the period just as I was educated and we see The USA as a model, the goal of life of my generation was to study abroad. After generations, China knows West much more actually than the West knows China, as China was less important to the West during the China’s learning West period, so that it is natural that much of the rencent changes happened inside China were overlooked by West. As China rises to the spotlight in recnet years, it is to the suprise of the West as China is still thought as a bad learning pupile who was not very obedient as East Europe and fromer USSR and came out through a method which was told wrong by the West teachers. So, I strongly suggest the West should go China to update while China should quicken the process of democracy and propaganda the world the nowadays China. “

  3. terminatorii

    Comments from Jun Cao:

    “Very obviously, Mr Hugo Restall of the WSJ Editorial Board has betrayed the very fundamental ethics of being fair when reporting. The whole article is filled with malicious and intentional distortion of facts were expressed in a very hidden way. For example,

    1. the author did mention that “East Turkistan” existed in history but failed to tell the reader that the “East Turkistan” existed there only for less than 2 years and no western countries have every aknowledged its existence.

    2. The author wants to blame everything of 75 on chinese government and misguided the readers. But the author from the human rights example country never expressed any concern and console to those 156 ppl killed in the riots, most of which are ethnic Han. THe author is so hypocritical that he wants the readers to believe all innocent Han deserve the death due to “political incorrectness”. Hugo, you really make sick.

    3. THe author tends to believe everything Rebiya said and the most shameless words he used in the article is “round up” , which he even distorted what Rebiya said ” 10,000 ppl disappeared”. Why Mr Hugo did this? WHat makes me believe is that Mr Hugo wants to make a liar’s words more plausible.

    4. This article is filled with ignorance of how China works, the majority thing the author writes here are one-sided story. The author repetitively emphasize the grievance of Uighur but even failed to give very very concrete example./

    5. In summary, Hugo is a typical author who has been brainwashed by typical cold war propaganda.

    Finally, the fact that Mr Hugo is a member of WSJ Editorial Board enhanced my faith that I should be no more a subscriber of WSJ. I don’t want to pay USD 99 to buy in information conferred by a typical cold war newspaper. Reading such things can only make ppl silly.

    Finally to Mr Hugo: THERE IS NO WAY TO PREVENT CHINESE FROM MAINTAINING SOVEREIGNTY INTEGRITY. YOUR LOGIC THAT “HUMAN RIGHTS IS HIGHER THAN SOVEREIGNTY” WILL MEET VERY VERY VERY HIGH RESISTANCE FROM EVEN COMMON CHINESE PEOPLE.

    AND MR HUGO , DON;’T POINT YOUR FINGERS TO OTHERS WHILE THE US AND THE WESTERN COUNTRIES THEMSELVES ARE SERIOUS VIOLATORS OF HUMAN RIGHTS THROUGHOUT THE HISTORY. DON’;T YOU FORGET THE SLAVE? THE CHINESE EXCLUSION LAW? THE ONSLAUGHTER OF NATIVE INDIANS? THE LYNCHING OF AFRICAN AMERICAN? THE KILLING OF INNOCENT CIVILIANS IN IRAQ AND AFHANISTAN?

    While your hands are dirty, who gives the rights to blame others? Mr Hugo, I should say, the articles you write is an articles filled with distorted facts, hatred and lies. Maybe you also write an article on bin Laden, he defintely has something to say because he believes that western Muslims are discriminated and repressed.

    Finally, Xinjiang will always be a part of China no matter what dirty lies WSJ writes.”

  4. terminatorii

    “the tongue is the most evil thing when misused”

    – Bible

    Perfect description for the “free media”.

  5. terminatorii

    Comment from Dan Rice:

    *
    Journal Community
    o close window
    Send a Message
    Type your personal message.
    Journal Community
    o close window
    Your message has been sent.
    o Close window
    Message
    *
    Journal Community
    o close window
    Make a Connection
    Type your personal message.
    Journal Community
    o close window
    Your message has been sent.
    o Close window
    Connect

    The report will be more balanced if Mr. Restall could

    1. Tell readers that historically the Uighurs are also new immigrants in Xinjiang. They have been living in Xinjiang, especially the northern part including Urumqi, for no more than 300 years while the Chinese started settlement there 2200 years ago. It should be more complicated than simply implying that historically the Han Chinese have never existed there.

    2. Elaborate how much Ms. Kadeer knew about the riots before it started and what attitudes she had about the killings, pro or against?

    3. Let readers know that among the 197 deaths in the riot in Urumqi, about 170 were Han Chinese who stand for 75% of the population in the city.

    4. Make a comparison between US Indians studying English and Chinese Uighurs studying Chinese and let reader know why it is wrong for those Uighurs to choose to study Chinese and better suit the society.

    5. Tell readers why rural Uighur youths should not seek factory work in East China (or “deportation” as Mr Restall wrote) to improve their living and help their family back in Xinjiang economically. Ms. Kadeer didn’t mention whether those Uighurs are happy with going out their rural home to work in East China (“deportation”) and make more money either.

    I am a Han Chinese and am writing this out of my free will. This writing is NOT Chinese “government-orchestrated”.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s