Sprinkler Systems Uhaul move Lawn care Roses and trees Ford Parts Chrysler Parts Lake Powell New IPod Touch Apps New IPhone Apps IPhone Apps IPad Information IPad Apps Android APPS Android Games APPS Android Systems Android Tablets APPS and Beyond Smartphone Apps Smartphone Games Apps Repair and Tools Tablet PC Car Sharing Car Leasing Tabler Pc Fly Fishing Toyota Cars Vacation Rentals Stock market NYSE SSE Stock Freight & Shipping News Gluten Lactose Gout My Coupon Life Campgrounds Check Outdoor Kitchen Design and Redoo Bath Remodeling Palm Springs Las Vegas Vacation Tipps Lake Powell Boating Homes for lease Electric and green Car Blog Pearls and diamonds Whatsapp and forget SMS Blog, What is Whatsapp App Renovation Blog Condo for rent or lease Solar Panel Solar Energie Sun Power Blog Truck for Sale Reconstruction Blog
Reader


[Suche]  [Administrator]  [Hinweise zum Reader]  [Startseite]
Culture & Politics » soc.culture.china » Press Censorship
Press Censorship [message #221120] Di, 04 Juli 2006 22:46
ppp  
China's media faces fines for reporting disasters

Jonathan Watts in Beijing
Tuesday July 4, 2006
The Guardian
http://www.guardian.co.uk/china/story/0,,1812425,00.html

China, the world's biggest censor, is planning to tighten its controls
on the media with a new law that would impose financial penalties on
news organisations that report on emergencies without permission.
Despite opposition from mainland and Hong Kong journalists who say it
is a step backwards for press freedom, state council officials expect
the legislation to be adopted by the end of the year.

Under the draft law, newspapers and TV channels face fines of up to
£7,000 for unauthorised reports on natural disasters, accidents,
public health incidents and public safety disturbances deemed
misleading or harmful to social order.

If adopted, this would close the biggest loophole for domestic
reporters who try to beat the censors by putting out stories before
they are banned. Foreign and Hong Kong news outlets, which have
previously faced fewer restrictions than their mainland Chinese
counterparts, will also be liable to fines.

The controversial bill has been more than two years in the drafting.
It was first mooted in the aftermath of the Sars crisis, when China's
most daring news organisations broke new ground in exposing official
cover-ups of the disease. Their reports, which were constantly a step
ahead of the censors, led to the resignation of the health minister
and Beijing's mayor.

In the years since, the Communist authorities have responded by
rolling back media freedoms, closing down publications and locking up
some of the most prominent editors who exposed the Sars outbreak.
According to one international organisation, the Committee to Protect
Journalists, China imprisons more journalists than any other country,
with 32 domestic reporters currently in jail. In addition, Reporters
without Borders says 64 cyber-dissidents are in prison.

Several newspapers, websites and blogs have been shut down, editors
have been fired, and more sophisticated restrictions have been imposed
on online content and the use of internet cafes.

Chinese officials said the new law was primarily intended to penalise
local governments that are slow to release information about public
emergencies. They said news outlets would be punished only if they
made mistakes or their reporting had "grave social consequences".
Wang Yongqing, vice-minister of the state council's legislative
affairs office, told reporters: "Journalists and media organisations
have worked very hard to contribute to covering emergencies but I must
say that some individual journalists have filed wrong reports or even
fabricated facts."

News organisations fear the vague wording of the law will allow local
officials to interpret it in a way that prevents corruption scandals,
land protests, disease outbreaks and mining accidents from coming to
light.

Several of the bolder mainland news organisations have publicly
criticised the legislation. A commentator with the Southern Metropolis
Daily wrote: "We believe that the spirit of watchdog journalism should
be upheld in this law. But in fact this draft in its present form does
exactly the opposite and doubtless represents a step back."

Hong Kong news organisations - which break many stories that the
censors block on the mainland - say the new law would erode the
freedom they enjoy under the "one-party, two-systems" arrangement
covering the territory's relationship with the rest of China.

Serenade Woo Lai-wan, chairwoman of the Hong Kong Journalists
Association, told the South China Morning Post: "The public has the
right to know and reporters have the right to report. We are under one
country, two systems. The two legal systems are different. I don't see
why Hong Kong journalists have to follow this regulation."
Re: Press Censorship [message #221126 ] Di, 04 Juli 2006 23:01
rst0wxyz  
ppp [at] yahoo.com wrote:
> China's media faces fines for reporting disasters
>
> Jonathan Watts in Beijing
> Tuesday July 4, 2006
> The Guardian
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/china/story/0,,1812425,00.html
>
> China, the world's biggest censor, is planning to tighten its controls
> on the media with a new law that would impose financial penalties on
> news organisations that report on emergencies without permission.
> Despite opposition from mainland and Hong Kong journalists who say it
> is a step backwards for press freedom, state council officials expect
> the legislation to be adopted by the end of the year.
>
> Under the draft law, newspapers and TV channels face fines of up to
> =A37,000 for unauthorised reports on natural disasters, accidents,
> public health incidents and public safety disturbances deemed
> misleading or harmful to social order.
>
> If adopted, this would close the biggest loophole for domestic
> reporters who try to beat the censors by putting out stories before
> they are banned. Foreign and Hong Kong news outlets, which have
> previously faced fewer restrictions than their mainland Chinese
> counterparts, will also be liable to fines.
>
> The controversial bill has been more than two years in the drafting.
> It was first mooted in the aftermath of the Sars crisis, when China's
> most daring news organisations broke new ground in exposing official
> cover-ups of the disease. Their reports, which were constantly a step
> ahead of the censors, led to the resignation of the health minister
> and Beijing's mayor.
>
> In the years since, the Communist authorities have responded by
> rolling back media freedoms, closing down publications and locking up
> some of the most prominent editors who exposed the Sars outbreak.
> According to one international organisation, the Committee to Protect
> Journalists, China imprisons more journalists than any other country,
> with 32 domestic reporters currently in jail. In addition, Reporters
> without Borders says 64 cyber-dissidents are in prison.
>
> Several newspapers, websites and blogs have been shut down, editors
> have been fired, and more sophisticated restrictions have been imposed
> on online content and the use of internet cafes.
>
> Chinese officials said the new law was primarily intended to penalise
> local governments that are slow to release information about public
> emergencies. They said news outlets would be punished only if they
> made mistakes or their reporting had "grave social consequences".
> Wang Yongqing, vice-minister of the state council's legislative
> affairs office, told reporters: "Journalists and media organisations
> have worked very hard to contribute to covering emergencies but I must
> say that some individual journalists have filed wrong reports or even
> fabricated facts."
>
> News organisations fear the vague wording of the law will allow local
> officials to interpret it in a way that prevents corruption scandals,
> land protests, disease outbreaks and mining accidents from coming to
> light.
>
> Several of the bolder mainland news organisations have publicly
> criticised the legislation. A commentator with the Southern Metropolis
> Daily wrote: "We believe that the spirit of watchdog journalism should
> be upheld in this law. But in fact this draft in its present form does
> exactly the opposite and doubtless represents a step back."
>
> Hong Kong news organisations - which break many stories that the
> censors block on the mainland - say the new law would erode the
> freedom they enjoy under the "one-party, two-systems" arrangement
> covering the territory's relationship with the rest of China.
>
> Serenade Woo Lai-wan, chairwoman of the Hong Kong Journalists
> Association, told the South China Morning Post: "The public has the
> right to know and reporters have the right to report. We are under one
> country, two systems. The two legal systems are different. I don't see
> why Hong Kong journalists have to follow this regulation."

There is no way the Chinese government can control the foreigner
journalists reporting outside of China. It would create conflicting
stories, one by foreign journalists and the other by "official" news
released by the Chinese government. The news from China or about China
will never be the same again.
Re: Press Censorship [message #221140 ] Di, 04 Juli 2006 23:39
ppp  
On 4 Jul 2006 14:01:51 -0700, "rst9wxyz [at] yahoo.com"
<rst0wxyz [at] yahoo.com> wrote:

>There is no way the Chinese government can control the foreigner
>journalists reporting outside of China. It would create conflicting
>stories, one by foreign journalists and the other by "official" news
>released by the Chinese government. The news from China or about China
>will never be the same again.


True. There are very few if any foreign correspondents based inside
the mainland. Most of their China news come from official Chinese
(government?) sources. Else they have stringers based inside China (a
risky profession) or based in Hongkong. Thus the proposed legislation
will hamsting these stringers too. There are freelance correspondents
for western media who work from inside China. But they know that
their presence can be easily compromised if they make objectional
reports. They can be banned from China thereafter. It is very rare
for any of them to risk this as the benefits of learning more about
China outweigh any China Bashing political fad that may come their
way..

There are too many people in China and very little goes on without
someone knowing about it. The proposed legislation will crimp the
ability of the local journalists to come up with a sensational scoop.
But the law cannot shut them up totally because the truth will out. A
foreign journalist may hear about it and file a report. The
difficulty is getting independent confirmation. It will damage its
reputation if the scoop proves to be unfounded.

This censorship law is new ground. I am very interested in how it
will turn out in practice.
Re: Press Censorship [message #221163 ] Mi, 05 Juli 2006 01:21
ltlee1  
ppp [at] yahoo.com wrote:
> On 4 Jul 2006 14:01:51 -0700, "rst9wxyz [at] yahoo.com"
> <rst0wxyz [at] yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >There is no way the Chinese government can control the foreigner
> >journalists reporting outside of China. It would create conflicting
> >stories, one by foreign journalists and the other by "official" news
> >released by the Chinese government. The news from China or about China
> >will never be the same again.
>
>
> True. There are very few if any foreign correspondents based inside
> the mainland. Most of their China news come from official Chinese
> (government?) sources. Else they have stringers based inside China (a
> risky profession) or based in Hongkong. Thus the proposed legislation
> will hamsting these stringers too. There are freelance correspondents
> for western media who work from inside China. But they know that
> their presence can be easily compromised if they make objectional
> reports. They can be banned from China thereafter. It is very rare
> for any of them to risk this as the benefits of learning more about
> China outweigh any China Bashing political fad that may come their
> way..
>
> There are too many people in China and very little goes on without
> someone knowing about it. The proposed legislation will crimp the
> ability of the local journalists to come up with a sensational scoop.
> But the law cannot shut them up totally because the truth will out. A
> foreign journalist may hear about it and file a report. The
> difficulty is getting independent confirmation. It will damage its
> reputation if the scoop proves to be unfounded.
>
> This censorship law is new ground.

And, AFAIK, based on considerations more nuanced and more pragmatic
than any their western counterpart.

> I am very interested in how it
> will turn out in practice.
Re: Press Censorship [message #221166 ] Di, 04 Juli 2006 23:04
lechergod  
of course, communists' dogs need same lyeing !!!


rst9wxyz [at] yahoo.com wrote:
> ppp [at] yahoo.com wrote:
>
>>China's media faces fines for reporting disasters
>>
>>Jonathan Watts in Beijing
>>Tuesday July 4, 2006
>>The Guardian
>>http://www.guardian.co.uk/china/story/0,,1812425,00.html
>>
>>China, the world's biggest censor, is planning to tighten its controls
>>on the media with a new law that would impose financial penalties on
>>news organisations that report on emergencies without permission.
>>Despite opposition from mainland and Hong Kong journalists who say it
>>is a step backwards for press freedom, state council officials expect
>>the legislation to be adopted by the end of the year.
>>
>>Under the draft law, newspapers and TV channels face fines of up to
>>£7,000 for unauthorised reports on natural disasters, accidents,
>>public health incidents and public safety disturbances deemed
>>misleading or harmful to social order.
>>
>>If adopted, this would close the biggest loophole for domestic
>>reporters who try to beat the censors by putting out stories before
>>they are banned. Foreign and Hong Kong news outlets, which have
>>previously faced fewer restrictions than their mainland Chinese
>>counterparts, will also be liable to fines.
>>
>>The controversial bill has been more than two years in the drafting.
>>It was first mooted in the aftermath of the Sars crisis, when China's
>>most daring news organisations broke new ground in exposing official
>>cover-ups of the disease. Their reports, which were constantly a step
>>ahead of the censors, led to the resignation of the health minister
>>and Beijing's mayor.
>>
>>In the years since, the Communist authorities have responded by
>>rolling back media freedoms, closing down publications and locking up
>>some of the most prominent editors who exposed the Sars outbreak.
>>According to one international organisation, the Committee to Protect
>>Journalists, China imprisons more journalists than any other country,
>>with 32 domestic reporters currently in jail. In addition, Reporters
>>without Borders says 64 cyber-dissidents are in prison.
>>
>>Several newspapers, websites and blogs have been shut down, editors
>>have been fired, and more sophisticated restrictions have been imposed
>>on online content and the use of internet cafes.
>>
>>Chinese officials said the new law was primarily intended to penalise
>>local governments that are slow to release information about public
>>emergencies. They said news outlets would be punished only if they
>>made mistakes or their reporting had "grave social consequences".
>>Wang Yongqing, vice-minister of the state council's legislative
>>affairs office, told reporters: "Journalists and media organisations
>>have worked very hard to contribute to covering emergencies but I must
>>say that some individual journalists have filed wrong reports or even
>>fabricated facts."
>>
>>News organisations fear the vague wording of the law will allow local
>>officials to interpret it in a way that prevents corruption scandals,
>>land protests, disease outbreaks and mining accidents from coming to
>>light.
>>
>>Several of the bolder mainland news organisations have publicly
>>criticised the legislation. A commentator with the Southern Metropolis
>>Daily wrote: "We believe that the spirit of watchdog journalism should
>>be upheld in this law. But in fact this draft in its present form does
>>exactly the opposite and doubtless represents a step back."
>>
>>Hong Kong news organisations - which break many stories that the
>>censors block on the mainland - say the new law would erode the
>>freedom they enjoy under the "one-party, two-systems" arrangement
>>covering the territory's relationship with the rest of China.
>>
>>Serenade Woo Lai-wan, chairwoman of the Hong Kong Journalists
>>Association, told the South China Morning Post: "The public has the
>>right to know and reporters have the right to report. We are under one
>>country, two systems. The two legal systems are different. I don't see
>>why Hong Kong journalists have to follow this regulation."
>
>
> There is no way the Chinese government can control the foreigner
> journalists reporting outside of China. It would create conflicting
> stories, one by foreign journalists and the other by "official" news
> released by the Chinese government. The news from China or about China
> will never be the same again.
>

---

Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net

Complaints to news [at] netfront.net
Re: Press Censorship [message #221199 ] Mi, 05 Juli 2006 04:01
bmoore  
ltlee1 wrote:
> ppp [at] yahoo.com wrote:
> > On 4 Jul 2006 14:01:51 -0700, "rst9wxyz [at] yahoo.com"
> > <rst0wxyz [at] yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > >There is no way the Chinese government can control the foreigner
> > >journalists reporting outside of China. It would create conflicting
> > >stories, one by foreign journalists and the other by "official" news
> > >released by the Chinese government. The news from China or about China
> > >will never be the same again.
> >
> >
> > True. There are very few if any foreign correspondents based inside
> > the mainland. Most of their China news come from official Chinese
> > (government?) sources. Else they have stringers based inside China (a
> > risky profession) or based in Hongkong. Thus the proposed legislation
> > will hamsting these stringers too. There are freelance correspondents
> > for western media who work from inside China. But they know that
> > their presence can be easily compromised if they make objectional
> > reports. They can be banned from China thereafter. It is very rare
> > for any of them to risk this as the benefits of learning more about
> > China outweigh any China Bashing political fad that may come their
> > way..
> >
> > There are too many people in China and very little goes on without
> > someone knowing about it. The proposed legislation will crimp the
> > ability of the local journalists to come up with a sensational scoop.
> > But the law cannot shut them up totally because the truth will out. A
> > foreign journalist may hear about it and file a report. The
> > difficulty is getting independent confirmation. It will damage its
> > reputation if the scoop proves to be unfounded.
> >
> > This censorship law is new ground.
>
> And, AFAIK, based on considerations more nuanced and more pragmatic
> than any their western counterpart.

LT's chauvinism shows through again. When viewed through his lens of
distortion, every action taken by the CCP is a stroke of genius. It's
not unlike Hu Jintao saying that the CCP is of an "advanced nature,"
while conveniently never actually saying what that means. So it can
mean anything that suits the moment.


> > I am very interested in how it
> > will turn out in practice.
Re: Press Censorship [message #221213 ] Mi, 05 Juli 2006 05:37
ppp  
On 4 Jul 2006 19:01:21 -0700, bmoore [at] nyx.net wrote:

>LT's chauvinism shows through again. When viewed through his lens of
>distortion, every action taken by the CCP is a stroke of genius.

>It's not unlike Hu Jintao saying that the CCP is of an "advanced nature,"
>while conveniently never actually saying what that means. So it can
>mean anything that suits the moment.

Now Bob. That's not a fair statement. President Hu rarely if ever
talks off the cuff. His and Premier Wen's speeches are carefully
vetted documents. A close reading of them will usually reveal policy
decisions and directions that are close to actual implementation. I
haven't come across any of China's top leaders having to retract
anything said yet. I haven't come across any pie-in-the-sky promises
of a socialist heaven on earth either.

Can you copy the article where " Hu Jintao saying that the CCP is of
an "advanced nature," " so that we can examine the context in which
that was uttered. It does sound like gobblydygook.
Re: Press Censorship [message #222127 ] Fr, 07 Juli 2006 19:18
ltlee1  
ppp [at] yahoo.com wrote:
> On 4 Jul 2006 19:01:21 -0700, bmoore [at] nyx.net wrote:
>
> >LT's chauvinism shows through again. When viewed through his lens of
> >distortion, every action taken by the CCP is a stroke of genius.
>
> >It's not unlike Hu Jintao saying that the CCP is of an "advanced nature,"
> >while conveniently never actually saying what that means. So it can
> >mean anything that suits the moment.
>
> Now Bob. That's not a fair statement. President Hu rarely if ever
> talks off the cuff. His and Premier Wen's speeches are carefully
> vetted documents. A close reading of them will usually reveal policy
> decisions and directions that are close to actual implementation. I
> haven't come across any of China's top leaders having to retract
> anything said yet. I haven't come across any pie-in-the-sky promises
> of a socialist heaven on earth either.

Typical Bmoore. He criticizes me just to get him an opportunity to bash
China.

>
> Can you copy the article where " Hu Jintao saying that the CCP is of
> an "advanced nature," " so that we can examine the context in which
> that was uttered. It does sound like gobblydygook.
Re: Press Censorship [message #222199 ] Sa, 08 Juli 2006 03:38
lechergod  
this communists' dog is an outlet to let others know how bad PRC is,
it is truth, so not bash !!!!
only communists' dog are telling too many lies to bash democracy !!!


ltlee1 wrote:
>
>
> Typical Bmoore. He criticizes me just to get him an opportunity to bash
> China.
>



---

Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net

Complaints to news [at] netfront.net
Cutting the Walter Lippmann vs William James/John Dewey Knot Re: Press Censorship [message #224909 ] Do, 13 Juli 2006 19:45
ltlee1  
1. Walter Lippmann vs William James/John Dewey Knot
2. Mao's mass line and internet as the tool to cut the knot.

Implication: China's policy will be to tighten press control and to
liberate/encorage online discussion.

ltlee1 wrote:
> ppp [at] yahoo.com wrote:
> > On 4 Jul 2006 14:01:51 -0700, "rst9wxyz [at] yahoo.com"
> > <rst0wxyz [at] yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > >There is no way the Chinese government can control the foreigner
> > >journalists reporting outside of China. It would create conflicting
> > >stories, one by foreign journalists and the other by "official" news
> > >released by the Chinese government. The news from China or about China
> > >will never be the same again.
> >
> >
> > True. There are very few if any foreign correspondents based inside
> > the mainland. Most of their China news come from official Chinese
> > (government?) sources. Else they have stringers based inside China (a
> > risky profession) or based in Hongkong. Thus the proposed legislation
> > will hamsting these stringers too. There are freelance correspondents
> > for western media who work from inside China. But they know that
> > their presence can be easily compromised if they make objectional
> > reports. They can be banned from China thereafter. It is very rare
> > for any of them to risk this as the benefits of learning more about
> > China outweigh any China Bashing political fad that may come their
> > way..
> >
> > There are too many people in China and very little goes on without
> > someone knowing about it. The proposed legislation will crimp the
> > ability of the local journalists to come up with a sensational scoop.
> > But the law cannot shut them up totally because the truth will out. A
> > foreign journalist may hear about it and file a report. The
> > difficulty is getting independent confirmation. It will damage its
> > reputation if the scoop proves to be unfounded.
> >
> > This censorship law is new ground.
>
> And, AFAIK, based on considerations more nuanced and more pragmatic
> than any their western counterpart.
>
> > I am very interested in how it
> > will turn out in practice.
Re: Cutting the Walter Lippmann vs William James/John Dewey KnotRe: Press Censorship [message #225001 ] Fr, 14 Juli 2006 01:15
lechergod  
encouraging by banning internet connection to outside world !!!!
that is communists' dog's cheating language !!!!


ltlee1 wrote:

> 1. Walter Lippmann vs William James/John Dewey Knot
> 2. Mao's mass line and internet as the tool to cut the knot.
>
> Implication: China's policy will be to tighten press control and to
> liberate/encorage online discussion.
>
> ltlee1 wrote:
>
>>ppp [at] yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>>>On 4 Jul 2006 14:01:51 -0700, "rst9wxyz [at] yahoo.com"
>>><rst0wxyz [at] yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>There is no way the Chinese government can control the foreigner
>>>>journalists reporting outside of China. It would create conflicting
>>>>stories, one by foreign journalists and the other by "official" news
>>>>released by the Chinese government. The news from China or about China
>>>>will never be the same again.
>>>
>>>
>>>True. There are very few if any foreign correspondents based inside
>>>the mainland. Most of their China news come from official Chinese
>>>(government?) sources. Else they have stringers based inside China (a
>>>risky profession) or based in Hongkong. Thus the proposed legislation
>>>will hamsting these stringers too. There are freelance correspondents
>>>for western media who work from inside China. But they know that
>>>their presence can be easily compromised if they make objectional
>>>reports. They can be banned from China thereafter. It is very rare
>>>for any of them to risk this as the benefits of learning more about
>>>China outweigh any China Bashing political fad that may come their
>>>way..
>>>
>>>There are too many people in China and very little goes on without
>>>someone knowing about it. The proposed legislation will crimp the
>>>ability of the local journalists to come up with a sensational scoop.
>>>But the law cannot shut them up totally because the truth will out. A
>>>foreign journalist may hear about it and file a report. The
>>>difficulty is getting independent confirmation. It will damage its
>>>reputation if the scoop proves to be unfounded.
>>>
>>>This censorship law is new ground.
>>
>>And, AFAIK, based on considerations more nuanced and more pragmatic
>>than any their western counterpart.
>>
>>
>>>I am very interested in how it
>>>will turn out in practice.
>
>

---

Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net

Complaints to news [at] netfront.net
Re: Cutting the Walter Lippmann vs William James/John Dewey Knot Re: Press Censorship [message #225144 ] Fr, 14 Juli 2006 16:48
ltlee1  
lechergod wrote:
> encouraging by banning internet connection to outside world !!!!

Internet connection to this or that site has nothing to do with the
ability to debate and the ability to change information into useful
information. People have debate for millenia without much access. The
point is not whether one can access a certain site, the point is
whether accessing a certain site will contribute constructively.

Otherwise, openning the debate is the trend.
http://www.cnd.org/my/modules/wfsection/article.php%3Farticl eid=14331

> that is communists' dog's cheating language !!!!

You are doing a good job giving China and Chinese bashers a bad name.
Keep up the good work.
>
>
> ltlee1 wrote:
>
> > 1. Walter Lippmann vs William James/John Dewey Knot
> > 2. Mao's mass line and internet as the tool to cut the knot.
> >
> > Implication: China's policy will be to tighten press control and to
> > liberate/encorage online discussion.
> >
> > ltlee1 wrote:
> >
> >>ppp [at] yahoo.com wrote:
> >>
> >>>On 4 Jul 2006 14:01:51 -0700, "rst9wxyz [at] yahoo.com"
> >>><rst0wxyz [at] yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>There is no way the Chinese government can control the foreigner
> >>>>journalists reporting outside of China. It would create conflicting
> >>>>stories, one by foreign journalists and the other by "official" news
> >>>>released by the Chinese government. The news from China or about China
> >>>>will never be the same again.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>True. There are very few if any foreign correspondents based inside
> >>>the mainland. Most of their China news come from official Chinese
> >>>(government?) sources. Else they have stringers based inside China (a
> >>>risky profession) or based in Hongkong. Thus the proposed legislation
> >>>will hamsting these stringers too. There are freelance correspondents
> >>>for western media who work from inside China. But they know that
> >>>their presence can be easily compromised if they make objectional
> >>>reports. They can be banned from China thereafter. It is very rare
> >>>for any of them to risk this as the benefits of learning more about
> >>>China outweigh any China Bashing political fad that may come their
> >>>way..
> >>>
> >>>There are too many people in China and very little goes on without
> >>>someone knowing about it. The proposed legislation will crimp the
> >>>ability of the local journalists to come up with a sensational scoop.
> >>>But the law cannot shut them up totally because the truth will out. A
> >>>foreign journalist may hear about it and file a report. The
> >>>difficulty is getting independent confirmation. It will damage its
> >>>reputation if the scoop proves to be unfounded.
> >>>
> >>>This censorship law is new ground.
> >>
> >>And, AFAIK, based on considerations more nuanced and more pragmatic
> >>than any their western counterpart.
> >>
> >>
> >>>I am very interested in how it
> >>>will turn out in practice.
> >
> >
>
> ---
> Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net
> Complaints to news [at] netfront.net
Re: Cutting the Walter Lippmann vs William James/John Dewey KnotRe: Press Censorship [message #225170 ] Fr, 14 Juli 2006 18:04
lechergod  
ha ha ha ha
that is communists' dog !!!
to conceal the people in a closed cage,
not to let them know what is the world,
then let you debate under close supervision.
ha ha ha
what dare the people can say ?????

thank you for your flattering me !!!
it shows facts I put on are not wasted !!!
people will then knows the way to go,
not to be dragged at nose by corruptive officials and communists' dog as
you ltlee1 !!!!


ltlee1 wrote:

> lechergod wrote:
>
>>encouraging by banning internet connection to outside world !!!!
>
>
> Internet connection to this or that site has nothing to do with the
> ability to debate and the ability to change information into useful
> information. People have debate for millenia without much access. The
> point is not whether one can access a certain site, the point is
> whether accessing a certain site will contribute constructively.
>
> Otherwise, openning the debate is the trend.
> http://www.cnd.org/my/modules/wfsection/article.php%3Farticl eid=14331
>
>
>>that is communists' dog's cheating language !!!!
>
>
> You are doing a good job giving China and Chinese bashers a bad name.
> Keep up the good work.
>
>>
>>ltlee1 wrote:
>>
>>
>>>1. Walter Lippmann vs William James/John Dewey Knot
>>>2. Mao's mass line and internet as the tool to cut the knot.
>>>
>>>Implication: China's policy will be to tighten press control and to
>>>liberate/encorage online discussion.
>>>
>>>ltlee1 wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>ppp [at] yahoo.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>On 4 Jul 2006 14:01:51 -0700, "rst9wxyz [at] yahoo.com"
>>>>><rst0wxyz [at] yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>There is no way the Chinese government can control the foreigner
>>>>>>journalists reporting outside of China. It would create conflicting
>>>>>>stories, one by foreign journalists and the other by "official" news
>>>>>>released by the Chinese government. The news from China or about China
>>>>>>will never be the same again.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>True. There are very few if any foreign correspondents based inside
>>>>>the mainland. Most of their China news come from official Chinese
>>>>>(government?) sources. Else they have stringers based inside China (a
>>>>>risky profession) or based in Hongkong. Thus the proposed legislation
>>>>>will hamsting these stringers too. There are freelance correspondents
>>>>>for western media who work from inside China. But they know that
>>>>>their presence can be easily compromised if they make objectional
>>>>>reports. They can be banned from China thereafter. It is very rare
>>>>>for any of them to risk this as the benefits of learning more about
>>>>>China outweigh any China Bashing political fad that may come their
>>>>>way..
>>>>>
>>>>>There are too many people in China and very little goes on without
>>>>>someone knowing about it. The proposed legislation will crimp the
>>>>>ability of the local journalists to come up with a sensational scoop.
>>>>>But the law cannot shut them up totally because the truth will out. A
>>>>>foreign journalist may hear about it and file a report. The
>>>>>difficulty is getting independent confirmation. It will damage its
>>>>>reputation if the scoop proves to be unfounded.
>>>>>
>>>>>This censorship law is new ground.
>>>>
>>>>And, AFAIK, based on considerations more nuanced and more pragmatic
>>>>than any their western counterpart.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I am very interested in how it
>>>>>will turn out in practice.
>>>
>>>
>>---
>>Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net
>>Complaints to news [at] netfront.net
>
>



---

Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net

Complaints to news [at] netfront.net
Re: Cutting the Walter Lippmann vs William James/John Dewey Knot Re: Press Censorship [message #225182 ] Fr, 14 Juli 2006 19:04
ltlee1  
lechergod wrote:
> ha ha ha ha
> that is communists' dog !!!
> to conceal the people in a closed cage,
> not to let them know what is the world,
> then let you debate under close supervision.
> ha ha ha
> what dare the people can say ?????

You underestimate the people.
If you believe democracy, you must trust the people. Else, you are a
fake or your don't understand democracy.


>
> thank you for your flattering me !!!
> it shows facts I put on are not wasted !!!
> people will then knows the way to go,
> not to be dragged at nose by corruptive officials and communists' dog as
> you ltlee1 !!!!
>
>
> ltlee1 wrote:
>
> > lechergod wrote:
> >
> >>encouraging by banning internet connection to outside world !!!!
> >
> >
> > Internet connection to this or that site has nothing to do with the
> > ability to debate and the ability to change information into useful
> > information. People have debate for millenia without much access. The
> > point is not whether one can access a certain site, the point is
> > whether accessing a certain site will contribute constructively.
> >
> > Otherwise, openning the debate is the trend.
> > http://www.cnd.org/my/modules/wfsection/article.php%3Farticl eid=14331
> >
> >
> >>that is communists' dog's cheating language !!!!
> >
> >
> > You are doing a good job giving China and Chinese bashers a bad name.
> > Keep up the good work.
> >
> >>
> >>ltlee1 wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>1. Walter Lippmann vs William James/John Dewey Knot
> >>>2. Mao's mass line and internet as the tool to cut the knot.
> >>>
> >>>Implication: China's policy will be to tighten press control and to
> >>>liberate/encorage online discussion.
> >>>
> >>>ltlee1 wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>ppp [at] yahoo.com wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>On 4 Jul 2006 14:01:51 -0700, "rst9wxyz [at] yahoo.com"
> >>>>><rst0wxyz [at] yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>There is no way the Chinese government can control the foreigner
> >>>>>>journalists reporting outside of China. It would create conflicting
> >>>>>>stories, one by foreign journalists and the other by "official" news
> >>>>>>released by the Chinese government. The news from China or about China
> >>>>>>will never be the same again.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>True. There are very few if any foreign correspondents based inside
> >>>>>the mainland. Most of their China news come from official Chinese
> >>>>>(government?) sources. Else they have stringers based inside China (a
> >>>>>risky profession) or based in Hongkong. Thus the proposed legislation
> >>>>>will hamsting these stringers too. There are freelance correspondents
> >>>>>for western media who work from inside China. But they know that
> >>>>>their presence can be easily compromised if they make objectional
> >>>>>reports. They can be banned from China thereafter. It is very rare
> >>>>>for any of them to risk this as the benefits of learning more about
> >>>>>China outweigh any China Bashing political fad that may come their
> >>>>>way..
> >>>>>
> >>>>>There are too many people in China and very little goes on without
> >>>>>someone knowing about it. The proposed legislation will crimp the
> >>>>>ability of the local journalists to come up with a sensational scoop.
> >>>>>But the law cannot shut them up totally because the truth will out. A
> >>>>>foreign journalist may hear about it and file a report. The
> >>>>>difficulty is getting independent confirmation. It will damage its
> >>>>>reputation if the scoop proves to be unfounded.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>This censorship law is new ground.
> >>>>
> >>>>And, AFAIK, based on considerations more nuanced and more pragmatic
> >>>>than any their western counterpart.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>I am very interested in how it
> >>>>>will turn out in practice.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>---
> >>Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net
> >>Complaints to news [at] netfront.net
> >
> >
>
>
>
> ---
> Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net
> Complaints to news [at] netfront.net
Re: Cutting the Walter Lippmann vs William James/John Dewey Knot Re: Press Censorship [message #225196 ] Fr, 14 Juli 2006 20:02
rst0wxyz  
ltlee1 wrote:
> lechergod wrote:
> > encouraging by banning internet connection to outside world !!!!
>
> Internet connection to this or that site has nothing to do with the
> ability to debate and the ability to change information into useful
> information. People have debate for millenia without much access. The
> point is not whether one can access a certain site, the point is
> whether accessing a certain site will contribute constructively.
>
> Otherwise, openning the debate is the trend.
> http://www.cnd.org/my/modules/wfsection/article.php%3Farticl eid=14331
>
> > that is communists' dog's cheating language !!!!
>
> You are doing a good job giving China and Chinese bashers a bad name.

That is what he wanted, and that is what he got.

> Keep up the good work.
> >
> >
> > ltlee1 wrote:
> >
> > > 1. Walter Lippmann vs William James/John Dewey Knot
> > > 2. Mao's mass line and internet as the tool to cut the knot.
> > >
> > > Implication: China's policy will be to tighten press control and to
> > > liberate/encorage online discussion.
> > >
> > > ltlee1 wrote:
> > >
> > >>ppp [at] yahoo.com wrote:
> > >>
> > >>>On 4 Jul 2006 14:01:51 -0700, "rst9wxyz [at] yahoo.com"
> > >>><rst0wxyz [at] yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>There is no way the Chinese government can control the foreigner
> > >>>>journalists reporting outside of China. It would create conflicting
> > >>>>stories, one by foreign journalists and the other by "official" news
> > >>>>released by the Chinese government. The news from China or about China
> > >>>>will never be the same again.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>True. There are very few if any foreign correspondents based inside
> > >>>the mainland. Most of their China news come from official Chinese
> > >>>(government?) sources. Else they have stringers based inside China (a
> > >>>risky profession) or based in Hongkong. Thus the proposed legislation
> > >>>will hamsting these stringers too. There are freelance correspondents
> > >>>for western media who work from inside China. But they know that
> > >>>their presence can be easily compromised if they make objectional
> > >>>reports. They can be banned from China thereafter. It is very rare
> > >>>for any of them to risk this as the benefits of learning more about
> > >>>China outweigh any China Bashing political fad that may come their
> > >>>way..
> > >>>
> > >>>There are too many people in China and very little goes on without
> > >>>someone knowing about it. The proposed legislation will crimp the
> > >>>ability of the local journalists to come up with a sensational scoop.
> > >>>But the law cannot shut them up totally because the truth will out. A
> > >>>foreign journalist may hear about it and file a report. The
> > >>>difficulty is getting independent confirmation. It will damage its
> > >>>reputation if the scoop proves to be unfounded.
> > >>>
> > >>>This censorship law is new ground.
> > >>
> > >>And, AFAIK, based on considerations more nuanced and more pragmatic
> > >>than any their western counterpart.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>I am very interested in how it
> > >>>will turn out in practice.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > ---
> > Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net
> > Complaints to news [at] netfront.net
Re: Press Censorship [message #225229 ] Fr, 14 Juli 2006 22:53
bmoore  
ltlee1 wrote:
> ppp [at] yahoo.com wrote:
> > On 4 Jul 2006 19:01:21 -0700, bmoore [at] nyx.net wrote:
> >
> > >LT's chauvinism shows through again. When viewed through his lens of
> > >distortion, every action taken by the CCP is a stroke of genius.
> >
> > >It's not unlike Hu Jintao saying that the CCP is of an "advanced nature,"
> > >while conveniently never actually saying what that means. So it can
> > >mean anything that suits the moment.
> >
> > Now Bob. That's not a fair statement. President Hu rarely if ever
> > talks off the cuff. His and Premier Wen's speeches are carefully
> > vetted documents. A close reading of them will usually reveal policy
> > decisions and directions that are close to actual implementation. I
> > haven't come across any of China's top leaders having to retract
> > anything said yet. I haven't come across any pie-in-the-sky promises
> > of a socialist heaven on earth either.
>
> Typical Bmoore. He criticizes me just to get him an opportunity to bash
> China.

No, LT. I don't criticize you just to get an opportunity to bash China.
I criticize you when you are deceiful and dishonest, which you often
are. This is just one of many examples.

> >
> > Can you copy the article where " Hu Jintao saying that the CCP is of
> > an "advanced nature," " so that we can examine the context in which
> > that was uttered. It does sound like gobblydygook.
Re: Press Censorship [message #225232 ] Fr, 14 Juli 2006 23:01
bmoore  
ppp [at] yahoo.com wrote:
> On 4 Jul 2006 19:01:21 -0700, bmoore [at] nyx.net wrote:
>
> >LT's chauvinism shows through again. When viewed through his lens of
> >distortion, every action taken by the CCP is a stroke of genius.
>
> >It's not unlike Hu Jintao saying that the CCP is of an "advanced nature,"
> >while conveniently never actually saying what that means. So it can
> >mean anything that suits the moment.
>
> Now Bob. That's not a fair statement. President Hu rarely if ever
> talks off the cuff.

I didn't mean he talks off the cuff. I meant that this "advanced
nature" concept is vague and thus can be used to justify whatever
policies he is currently pushing.

> His and Premier Wen's speeches are carefully
> vetted documents. A close reading of them will usually reveal policy
> decisions and directions that are close to actual implementation. I
> haven't come across any of China's top leaders having to retract
> anything said yet. I haven't come across any pie-in-the-sky promises
> of a socialist heaven on earth either.
>
> Can you copy the article where " Hu Jintao saying that the CCP is of
> an "advanced nature," " so that we can examine the context in which
> that was uttered. It does sound like gobblydygook.

http://select.nytimes.com/search/restricted/article?res=FA0E 13FF3E540C728CDDAE0894DE404482

BEIJING, June 30 - President Hu Jintao of China said Friday that his
political concept of maintaining the ''advanced nature'' of the
Communist Party was the key to its survival, while warning that
corruption threatened to undermine its hold on power.
Mr. Hu, who is also the Communist Party's general secretary, used a
nationwide televised address on the eve of the 85th anniversary of the
founding of the ruling party to elevate his vague but now omnipresent
notion of xianjinxing, which translates literally as ''advancedness''
or ''advanced nature,'' into official doctrine.

He said that the essence of Marxist thought was to maintain an
''advanced nature'' and that the success of China's Communists in
fighting Japan, toppling the Nationalists, rising to power in 1949 and
creating economic prosperity in the past three decades can all be
attributed to the same idea.

''History proves that only when the party maintains its advanced nature
can it push forward both the party's and the people's mutual interests,
develop advanced production and advanced culture, and realize the
interests of the vast majority of the people,'' he said.

Mr. Hu has used the ''advanced nature'' campaign to eclipse the
political line of his predecessor, Jiang Zemin, who had sought to
enshrine the concept of ''Three Represents'' as China's guiding
ideology. Mr. Hu replaced Mr. Jiang as party leader in 2002 and pushed
him from his remaining post as military chief in 2004.

The Three Represents maintained that the party should represent
advanced production forces, advanced cultural forces and the
''overwhelming majority of Chinese people.''

''Advanced nature'' appears to be a purposefully broad and nondescript
concept that gives Mr. Hu and his supporters leeway to determine
policies that fit under its rubric, while punishing people who fail to
promote his goals.

[...]
Re: Cutting the Walter Lippmann vs William James/John Dewey Knot Re: Press Censorship [message #225234 ] Fr, 14 Juli 2006 23:08
bmoore  
ltlee1 wrote:
> lechergod wrote:
> > encouraging by banning internet connection to outside world !!!!
>
> Internet connection to this or that site has nothing to do with the
> ability to debate and the ability to change information into useful
> information. People have debate for millenia without much access. The
> point is not whether one can access a certain site, the point is
> whether accessing a certain site will contribute constructively.
>
> Otherwise, openning the debate is the trend.
> http://www.cnd.org/my/modules/wfsection/article.php%3Farticl eid=14331
>
> > that is communists' dog's cheating language !!!!
>
> You are doing a good job giving China and Chinese bashers a bad name.
> Keep up the good work.

It's nothing compared to the brainwashed, detached-from-reality
stereotype you are living up to, LT. Capable of rejecting even the most
obvious things, such that normal intelligent people can only look on
and shrug in disbelief, or shake their heads in disgust.

> >
> > ltlee1 wrote:
> >
> > > 1. Walter Lippmann vs William James/John Dewey Knot
> > > 2. Mao's mass line and internet as the tool to cut the knot.
> > >
> > > Implication: China's policy will be to tighten press control and to
> > > liberate/encorage online discussion.
> > >
> > > ltlee1 wrote:
> > >
> > >>ppp [at] yahoo.com wrote:
> > >>
> > >>>On 4 Jul 2006 14:01:51 -0700, "rst9wxyz [at] yahoo.com"
> > >>><rst0wxyz [at] yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>There is no way the Chinese government can control the foreigner
> > >>>>journalists reporting outside of China. It would create conflicting
> > >>>>stories, one by foreign journalists and the other by "official" news
> > >>>>released by the Chinese government. The news from China or about China
> > >>>>will never be the same again.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>True. There are very few if any foreign correspondents based inside
> > >>>the mainland. Most of their China news come from official Chinese
> > >>>(government?) sources. Else they have stringers based inside China (a
> > >>>risky profession) or based in Hongkong. Thus the proposed legislation
> > >>>will hamsting these stringers too. There are freelance correspondents
> > >>>for western media who work from inside China. But they know that
> > >>>their presence can be easily compromised if they make objectional
> > >>>reports. They can be banned from China thereafter. It is very rare
> > >>>for any of them to risk this as the benefits of learning more about
> > >>>China outweigh any China Bashing political fad that may come their
> > >>>way..
> > >>>
> > >>>There are too many people in China and very little goes on without
> > >>>someone knowing about it. The proposed legislation will crimp the
> > >>>ability of the local journalists to come up with a sensational scoop.
> > >>>But the law cannot shut them up totally because the truth will out. A
> > >>>foreign journalist may hear about it and file a report. The
> > >>>difficulty is getting independent confirmation. It will damage its
> > >>>reputation if the scoop proves to be unfounded.
> > >>>
> > >>>This censorship law is new ground.
> > >>
> > >>And, AFAIK, based on considerations more nuanced and more pragmatic
> > >>than any their western counterpart.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>I am very interested in how it
> > >>>will turn out in practice.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > ---
> > Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net
> > Complaints to news [at] netfront.net
Re: Cutting the Walter Lippmann vs William James/John Dewey KnotRe: Press Censorship [message #225314 ] Sa, 15 Juli 2006 06:07
lechergod  
people is the master just as shareholder !!
it is the people to trust the corruptive officer.
people knows what is good for themselves,
not your master to say what is good !!!!!!
that is why you are communists' dog !!!!
you are really fake to cheat others with corrupt officials' fake
"democracy", setting to frame to cage people !!!


ltlee1 wrote:
> lechergod wrote:
>
>>ha ha ha ha
>>that is communists' dog !!!
>>to conceal the people in a closed cage,
>>not to let them know what is the world,
>>then let you debate under close supervision.
>>ha ha ha
>>what dare the people can say ?????
>
>
> You underestimate the people.
> If you believe democracy, you must trust the people. Else, you are a
> fake or your don't understand democracy.
>
>
>
>>thank you for your flattering me !!!
>>it shows facts I put on are not wasted !!!
>>people will then knows the way to go,
>>not to be dragged at nose by corruptive officials and communists' dog as
>>you ltlee1 !!!!
>>
>>
>>ltlee1 wrote:
>>
>>
>>>lechergod wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>encouraging by banning internet connection to outside world !!!!
>>>
>>>
>>>Internet connection to this or that site has nothing to do with the
>>>ability to debate and the ability to change information into useful
>>>information. People have debate for millenia without much access. The
>>>point is not whether one can access a certain site, the point is
>>>whether accessing a certain site will contribute constructively.
>>>
>>>Otherwise, openning the debate is the trend.
>>> http://www.cnd.org/my/modules/wfsection/article.php%3Farticl eid=14331
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>that is communists' dog's cheating language !!!!
>>>
>>>
>>>You are doing a good job giving China and Chinese bashers a bad name.
>>>Keep up the good work.
>>>
>>>
>>>>ltlee1 wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>1. Walter Lippmann vs William James/John Dewey Knot
>>>>>2. Mao's mass line and internet as the tool to cut the knot.
>>>>>
>>>>>Implication: China's policy will be to tighten press control and to
>>>>>liberate/encorage online discussion.
>>>>>
>>>>>ltlee1 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>ppp [at] yahoo.com wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On 4 Jul 2006 14:01:51 -0700, "rst9wxyz [at] yahoo.com"
>>>>>>><rst0wxyz [at] yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>There is no way the Chinese government can control the foreigner
>>>>>>>>journalists reporting outside of China. It would create conflicting
>>>>>>>>stories, one by foreign journalists and the other by "official" news
>>>>>>>>released by the Chinese government. The news from China or about China
>>>>>>>>will never be the same again.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>True. There are very few if any foreign correspondents based inside
>>>>>>>the mainland. Most of their China news come from official Chinese
>>>>>>>(government?) sources. Else they have stringers based inside China (a
>>>>>>>risky profession) or based in Hongkong. Thus the proposed legislation
>>>>>>>will hamsting these stringers too. There are freelance correspondents
>>>>>>>for western media who work from inside China. But they know that
>>>>>>>their presence can be easily compromised if they make objectional
>>>>>>>reports. They can be banned from China thereafter. It is very rare
>>>>>>>for any of them to risk this as the benefits of learning more about
>>>>>>>China outweigh any China Bashing political fad that may come their
>>>>>>>way..
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>There are too many people in China and very little goes on without
>>>>>>>someone knowing about it. The proposed legislation will crimp the
>>>>>>>ability of the local journalists to come up with a sensational scoop.
>>>>>>>But the law cannot shut them up totally because the truth will out. A
>>>>>>>foreign journalist may hear about it and file a report. The
>>>>>>>difficulty is getting independent confirmation. It will damage its
>>>>>>>reputation if the scoop proves to be unfounded.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>This censorship law is new ground.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>And, AFAIK, based on considerations more nuanced and more pragmatic
>>>>>>than any their western counterpart.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I am very interested in how it
>>>>>>>will turn out in practice.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>---
>>>>Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net
>>>>Complaints to news [at] netfront.net
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>---
>>Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net
>>Complaints to news [at] netfront.net
>
>

---

Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net

Complaints to news [at] netfront.net
Re: Cutting the Walter Lippmann vs William James/John Dewey KnotRe: Press Censorship [message #225315 ] Sa, 15 Juli 2006 06:09
lechergod  
communists' dogs' job is to fake a good name for his master !!!!
therefore they cannot subsist to facts and truth !!!


rst0wxyz [at] yahoo.com wrote:

> ltlee1 wrote:
>
>>
>>You are doing a good job giving China and Chinese bashers a bad name.
>
>
> That is what he wanted, and that is what he got.
>
>


---

Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net

Complaints to news [at] netfront.net
Re: Cutting the Walter Lippmann vs William James/John Dewey Knot Re: Press Censorship [message #225320 ] Sa, 15 Juli 2006 07:28
rst0wxyz  
lechergod wrote:
> communists' dogs' job is to fake a good name for his master !!!!
> therefore they cannot subsist to facts and truth !!!

Please explain what this means in plain English, lecher dog.

>
>
> rst0wxyz [at] yahoo.com wrote:
>
> > ltlee1 wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>You are doing a good job giving China and Chinese bashers a bad name.
> >
> >
> > That is what he wanted, and that is what he got.
> >
> >
>
>
> ---
> Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net
> Complaints to news [at] netfront.net
Vorheriges Thema:[«O¬Ó¬£¤Ï§å³JÀY, Alex Yen ²n¨ì¤£¦æ!]«O¬Ó¬£¤Ï§å§d¤D¼w¡B­S¶³¬O³JÀY!
Nächstes Thema:¤£ªÖ¦R¹ê! ¸q¶E¦³§¾¥Î?
Gehe zu:
  


aktuelle Zeit: So Mai 27 13:18:50 CEST 2012

Insgesamt benötigte Zeit, um die Seite zu erzeugen: 0,10118 Sekunden
.:: Startseite - Hinweise - Impressum ::.

Powered