Does CNN read this blog

The first direct flights since Mao Zedong's Communists took over China occurred between Taiwan and that country today.* My wife told me some related news which was equally exciting -- that local anchor Jinny Chang of FTV reported the news for CNN. Chang normally hosts the nightly FTV English Edition.

I published an angry post on December 12, 2004 strongly suggesting that CNN "send someone who: A) can speak Chinese; B) can speak Taiwanese; C) can speak English; and D) can be a real journalist!" instead of sending that incompetent asshole Mike Chinoy to cover important events in Taiwan.

In case someone's really reading this and following my advice, I hope that Chang will replace Chinoy from now on -- especially when the story involves either China or the current opposition parties.

*NOTE: When Mao took over China in 1949, forming the People's Republic of China, neither the old China nor the PRC ruled Taiwan -- so stop implying that!

The bullshit never stops

I haven't posted a "shootdown" for more than a week, but the stink's not over yet. There are a whole helluva lot more pan-blue lies that must be dealt with.

Break it down!
The section I covered in Part 14 of the "Shooting down 'Bulletgate'" series carries over to page 14 of the original document. I'm going to break this segment down just like I did with the last one, so pay close attention to what precedes each quoted section to see whose words they are.

Stand back, here comes more of the "Bulletgate" bullshit:

When Lu complained of pains, telling Chen that she might be wounded, instead of going to the nearby National Chengkung University Hospital, which was officially designated for such emergencies, the cavalcade sped to the private Chimei [sic] Hospital which was six kilometers away.

They think they're being sly, but the pan-blues are simply playing with words here.

Is "six kilometers" far? If you'd just been shot in the stomach, you might think so, but why aren't they specifying how far the National Chengkung University Hospital is? Is it because Chengkung is, in fact, even farther from the scene of the shooting than Chi Mei?

With just a tiny bit of research, we will have the answers to those questions in no time.

Despite the pan-blues' (feigned?) ignorance, the decision to go to Chi Mei Hospital has been explained. You might be surprised to know where the information can be found.

The anti-DPP, anti-Taiwan China Post (UGH!) published this interesting bit in an article on September 15, 2004 [All emphasis mine]:

The general [Chen Tsai-fu, who was in charge of the president's security on the day of the shooting] told the court he picked Chi Mei Hospital instead of National Chengkung University Hospital because the former was nearer.

Chengkung was only [sic] 5.3 km from the shooting scene, and the presidential motorcade would have had to make a U-turn and driven past large crowds of people through busy downtown traffic.

Chi Mei was 4.3 km away, and there was much less traffic on the road, the general said. [ALT. LINK]

So, what they're saying is: 1) Chi Mei is closer; 2) less traffic would make the trip even quicker; and 3) the route avoided further exposure to the shooter.

Does that just make pan-blue heads explode or what?! They sure love to defenestrate logic whenever it gets in their way. This information fucks up their argument all kinds of ways!

Dammit, why didn't he just die?! Boo hoo!
While the pan-blues say that the "nearby" NCKU Hospital "was officially designated for such emergencies," they don't say that it was the only one. According to the implied logic, if Chen had been shot in front of Chi Mei Hospital, his security detail still should have driven him to NCKU.

This does not compute -- unless the pan-blues wanted Chen Shui-bian to die -- and we know that they've made very open threats against him! [Click here and here for two documented examples.]

They're playing with the words. They're trying to fool you. And if that's all I said about this, I would be playing with words.

To put it bluntly, they're fucking lying is what they're doing. (But, if you've been reading this series for a while, I'm sure you knew that already.)

People in high places with friends in high places
"Bulletgate" goes on to tell us in the same paragraph which began at the beginning of this post:

That hospital [Chi Mei] is owned by Chen's close personal friend, Mr. Hsu Wen-lung, who, although an industrialist by profession, carries the title of Senior Policy Advisor to Chen. When they arrived at Chimei Hospital, Chen walked by himself into the emergency room, with no support or help from any medical personnel.

Who could imagine -- an industrialist and a senior policy advisor?! Well, anybody with a brain could imagine it, that's who! Chen Shui-bian is the president, and Tainan is his hometown, so it's not surprising that he would have such friends as Hsu and that he would appoint them to such positions.

You'd think he was "a dessert topping and a floor wax" the way the pan-blues tell it!

It's amusing that they mock Chen Shui-bian for having an industrialist as a policy advisor, but as I pointed out in Part 14, the pan-blues make their own important decisions based on things like feng shui and information obtained from "bookmakers."

UPDATE: (approximately 24 hours later)
Even though this horse should already be quite dead, my lovely wife -- after reading this post late last night -- has provided even more factual ammo with which to verily fuck up the arguments presented in this part of "Bulletgate."

Steve Chan, the superintendent of Chi Mei Hospital, says in a Chinese-language article published in the Liberty Times just one day after the shooting that Chi Mei was, in fact, a "designated" hospital and that "only those who don't understand Tainan County" would try to make the sort of arguments that were being made against taking President Chen to that hospital.

Chan, according to an extensive interview with TVBS' Chen Ya-lin, is a KMT member. In response to a question about this membership, he answers that "politics is politics, and professionalism is professionalism." An English-language article in the Taipei Times further reveals that Chan headed Taiwan's Department of Health during KMT rule.

The Liberty Times article linked above also quotes Chi Mei's deputy superintendent Lee Hao-hsien [a former student of PFP vice-chairman Chang Chao-hsiung] as saying that "he cherishes his teacher, but he cherishes the truth even more."

This demonstrates that despite ownership by a senior policy advisor to President Chen, Chi Mei Hospital is not some kind of DPP stronghold, having connections with the KMT and PFP at its highest levels. It also shows Steve Chan and Lee Hao-hshien to be two rare birds among those associated with the pan-blues.

The information in this update alone should be quite enough to knock any "conspiracy theories" about Chi Mei Hospital right down.

[All translations from Chinese-language articles quoted above mine.] [/END UPDATE]

Pan-blues a-milking...
And, if Chen walked into the hospital, what kind of person would come to the conclusion that he "milked the shooting to maximum effect"? Only a crazy person, an idiot, or a liar -- perhaps someone who meets all three criteria -- could say so!

But, wait! There's still more "Bulletgate" bullshit (which seems to have been tacked on at random):

An American team of forensic experts visited Taiwan in two groups for a total of four workdays to collect evidence for laboratory tests. Dr. Henry Lee, leader of the group, told the media before his departure that they could not find answers to many questions, because the scene of the crime had not been secured properly. He confirmed that Mr. Chen's grazing wound was not "self-inflicted," because "it is impossible for himself to fire that shot. " But whether it was "staged or not staged," Lee said, "it is a separate issue", to which he gave no answer. Judging from the available evidence however, Lee did rule out the possibility of "political assassination. "

Without hard evidence to provide an answer one way or the other, a good forensic scientist would tend not to draw conclusions about whether or not the shooting was staged. However, that doesn't stop Lien Chan's Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) from doing such things multiple times on their own web site.

As for Lee ruling out "political assassination," I've knocked this argument on its ass previously -- multiple times, in fact -- but it's worth repeating the "redux" yet again:

Previous post, redux
When I wrote in the last post about Henry Lee's dismissal of the possibility of a "political assassination," I had forgotten about this doozie from the National Policy Foundation web site:

Lien Chan and his running mate James Soong have asked Henry Lee, director emeritus of the Connecticut state police laboratory, to come to Taiwan to assist in the forensic identification of all the evidence collected so far.

[...]

One thing must be made very clear. Dr. Lee will only do criminal identification. He is not investigating the case. He may find out the shot that grazed Chen's abdomen was fired from within a dozen meters of an open jeep carrying the campaigning president and vice president. He may even prove the shot was fired a day before. But he cannot tell us why the sniper shot at the president and the vice president or who was, if there was, behind the sniping. [Emphasis mine]

For yet greater emphasis, I'll repeat part of that:

[Henry Lee] cannot tell us why the sniper shot at the president and the vice president or who was, if there was, behind the sniping.

Juxtapose that with this quote from earlier in the "Bulletgate" pamphlet:

[E]ven the noted forensics expert Dr. Henry Lee [...] has written off the possibility that it could have been a political assassination attempt.

Can you say "contradiction"? I knew that you could.

And that wraps up this segment. The next one will arrive just as soon as it's ready. Stay tuned!

NEXT UP: Qui s'excuse, s'accuse (or, when said of odors in elevators, "He who smelt it, dealt it")

Can you imagine an imaginary menagerie manager imagining managing an imaginary "truth" commission?

Here are all of today's news items from Taiwan's three English-language papers along with excerpts where applicable. I already said many similar things in a post I wrote in the wee hours of this morning.

[All emphasis and bracketed comments mine]

Taipei Times

Blue camp stands by shooting 'report'
The report issued by the March 19 Shooting Truth Investigation Special Committee on Monday passed the Procedure Committee yesterday despite the former being declared unconstitutional.

The report, which says the shooting of President Chen Shui-bian "did not occur as reported," and that the election might have been manipulated as a resulted, passed the committee along party lines, but not before lawmakers from the pan-blue and pan-green camps argued over the legitimacy of the investigation committee and its report.

CIB laughs off report by committee
In addition to "suggesting" that the Legislative Yuan should recall Chen, the committee said the Control Yuan should impeach the premier and all members of the Cabinet.

The report said that the committee's investigation "showed that the assassination attempt was not an attempted suicide, not a murder and not a crime committed by a psycho."

It was not immediately clear what facts led the committee to draw these conclusions. [Hmmm. Now it's an "assassination attempt," eh? Is it "not a murder" because the victims didn't die?! Could it be that they know these things because they hired the shooter and are now hiding him?!]

Nonetheless, the committee said it had "good reason" to believe that the shooting was staged because of "human manipulation" during the investigation. It then said that insufficient evidence had been produced regarding the shooting.

To bolster its claims of "human manipulation," the report said that National Security Council Secretary-General Chiou I-jen did not give up-to-the-minute and clear information during the initial press conference after the shooting occurred.

Furthermore, the committee said, the president and vice president had disappeared for "quite a long time" after the shooting.

[Ya think maybe they could've been in the hospital?!?! Duh!]

DPP heavyweights slam March 19 committee report
High-ranking Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) officials yesterday blasted the investigation report released by the March 19 Shooting Truth Investigation Special Committee as "absurd, ridiculous and unreasonable."

[...]

"The Presidential Office feels sorry that the March 19 Shooting Truth Investigation Special Committee members came to such conclusions without much scientific evidence," Presidential Secretary-General Su Tseng-chang said yesterday.

Su pointed out that although the members of the investigation committee have their own professional specialties, they are not forensic experts.

"I wonder how the commission members could reach conclusions that are so absurd, ridiculous and unreasonable," Su said. [Queens of denial?]

Su stated that according to the scientific evidence discovered by forensic expert Henry Lee and the National Police Agency's Criminal Investigation Bureau, Chen and Lu were proven to be victims of an assassination attempt.

"Moreover, the Council of Grand Justices has already ruled that the 319 Truth Investigation Commission is unconstitutional, and that many operations of the commission are considered to be unlawful," Su said.

"I couldn't detect the professional training of the commission members in this investigation report, only their emotions of hatred and grievance," Su said.

Kaohsiung Mayor Frank Hsieh said that the investigation report's conclusions lacked any hard evidence to back them up, but were rather based on imaginative reasoning alone.

[...]

Meanwhile, DPP caucus whip Ker Chien-ming denounced Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng for being so unfair that he allowed the investigation report to be listed on the legislative agenda this Thursday, ignoring legislative regulations.

Ker said that if the investigation report is to be reviewed in the legislative session tomorrow, the commission should have submitted it to the Legislative Yuan before noon Monday.

However, the investigation report was not released until Monday afternoon.

"Wang disregarded the legislative agenda and forced the procedure committee to add the investigation report to Thursday's session," Ker said.

"It is unacceptable for a legislature to review a biased investigation report that was conducted by an unconstitutional committee," Ker said.

Editorial: Illegitimacy spawns ludicrous report
Since the committee was established last October, judicial reform groups and academics have criticized the legislation that was forced through by pan-blue legislators, pointing out that some of the powers granted to the committee by the statute were unconstitutional. The constitutional interpretation by the Council of Grand Justices last month said that many articles relating to the structure of the committee were flawed and unconstitutional.

After the grand justices denied the legal status of the committee and the legitimacy of its operation, the committee members should have immediately sought to amend those articles with which the grand justices found fault. The committee could then have exercised the judicial investigative powers properly granted it by the legislature. It would then have been in a position to make a thorough investigation of an incident that shook the nation.

Given that the legislature is dominated by the pan-blue camp, passing such amendments would not have been difficult. But, incomprehensibly, the committee chose not to try to repair its legal standing. Instead, despite its illegitimacy, it went ahead and finished its "investigation report."

Taiwan News

Chen not subject to recall campaign
President Chen Shui-bian, who assumed his second term in May last year, is not subject to recall campaigns until he has served one year of his tenure, although the truth commission has suggested his removal.

Aware of the one-year protection, the opposition Kuomintang and People First Party have refrained from bold actions although they voiced respect yesterday for the commission's findings.

Ranking government and Democratic Progressive Party officials, however, blasted the panel's report as scientifically shaky and politically motivated.

[...]

Presidential Secretary-general Su Tseng-chang said the commission's conclusions were preposterous in light of its limited access to important documents and evidence.

Branding the panel a constitutional monster, the Cabinet has refused to fund the commission after seeking successfully to veto the law authorizing its creation. Citing similar concerns, the Ministry of Justice, the Criminal Investigation Bureau and other law-enforcement officers denied the commission's requests to review evidence and documents related to the shooting.

"It is unbelievable that the panel, whose legality was voided by the Council of Grand Justices, should have persisted in conducting the probe and has put forth a bunch of irresponsible conclusions and recommendations," Su said.

Seeking to defend the president, Su reiterated that Chen was the victim of the shooting, a fact, he added, that thus far has been supported by the ongoing investigation by Tainan prosecutors and police.

Cabinet spokesman Chen Chi-mai echoed Su's observation and attributed the commission's findings to its partisan makeup. "Formed by members recommended by the opposition parties, the panel had viewed the shooting through a political lens from the beginning and unsurprisingly, drew its conclusions despite the lack of scientific proof."

China Post

[Not a peep.] [Found 22 minutes later]

'Pan-blue' lawmakers reluctant to launch recall
The two major opposition parties yesterday would not commit themselves to a recall campaign against President Chen Shui-bian as proposed in what the Presidential Office dismissed as an "absurd" report on the March 19 shooting.

The "319 truth-finding committee," set up under a controversial law that the government has refused to recognize, on Monday released a 150-page report claiming the shooting was an "election ploy." [The report is actually 189 pages long This is an error of more than 20%.]

The committee, which had been denied access to key evidence because of disputes over its legitimacy, called on the Legislature to launch a campaign to recall Chen. [The so-called "disputes" were actually a ruling by the Council of Grand Justices that the statute to form the commission was "unconstitutional."

But the opposition Kuomintang and the People First Party, whose combined seats form a majority in the Legislature, said a recall campaign was a serious action that needed careful consideration of the political situation and public opinion.

Despite lauding the committee's investigation efforts, the two parties' lawmakers pointed out that Chen, inaugurated on May 20, is protected by the Constitution from being recalled within the first year of his current term.

Gee! I wonder why the China Post didn't have anything to say didn't list that on the index page of their web site.

A semi-aside to the "Bulletgate" shootdown

The so-called "319 Truth Commission" (AKA the "March 19 Shooting Truth Investigation Special Committee") was supposedly formed to find the "truth" behind the March 19, 2004 shooting of Taiwan's President Chen Shui-bian and V-P Annette Lu on the eve of last year's presidential election.

Just over one month ago, the Council of Grand Justices declared that the 100% pan-blue commission was unconstitutional.

Despite that declaration, the commission released a 189-page Chinese-language report on Monday whose conclusions seem to be as follows:

* There's a whole lotta stuff we can't figure out because we don't have any money.
* Anyway, our "common sense" beats science any day of the week.
* We can't believe anything Henry Lee says because all of it contradicts our goals.
* Besides, we can imagine all sorts of crazy things Henry Lee would never even think of.
* The only thing we want to talk about on the news is the lack of holes in Chen Shui-bian's pants and underwear.
* Although it seems to go beyond even the original scope of our unconstitutional statute, we recommend that the president be recalled!

On one local TV news report I saw a couple of hours ago, a reporter asked spokeswoman Wang Ching-feng if the commission had come up with any scientifically validated evidence. "No," came the answer. "We don't have the money to do that."

That didn't stop them from drawing the conclusions they did. Shit, why should it? They already had their minds made up last March!

More "clouds of suspicion"
Besides completely lacking in scientific perspective and objectivity, it seems a bit sloppy of them to be using loser presidential candidate Lien Chan's "clouds of suspicion" quote as the title of Chapter 2 of the document. It takes more than 5 pages of that chapter just to present a list demonstrating the magnitude of their incomprehension.

The introduction to that chapter has this to say [translation mine]:

With the reward money exceeding NT$53 million [US$1,661,702.46 at the current exchange rate], the shooter has yet to be caught.

Gee! If money solved everything, Osama bin Laden would be sitting in a jail someplace right about now.

Not a shred of evidence -- only unreasonable "doubts" -- and on this basis they want to recall the president?!

"Poll" dancing

Page 13 of "Bulletgate" contains blood, but it's not enough to satisfy the pan-blues' vampiric thirst. Anyway, they're still trying to distract people with their vague claims about "polls."

Before they attempt to mislead you down this dead end street, I will give you the forewarning you'll need in order to protect yourself from their dishonesty:

[Centered on the page is a photo of Chen Shui-bian's belly displaying his yet unstitched, but already cleaned gunshot wound.]

[PHOTO CAPTION:] Government-released photo showing Chen's grazing wound.

The Shooting Incident of March 19

Polls conducted by various independent institutions for 13 months up until March 19, all indicated that the Chen-Lu ticket, called the Pan Green alliance, was persistently trailing the Pan Blue Lien-Soong ticket by anywhere between 5 and 10 percent. Bookmakers in Taiwan, operating only half clandestinely, were offering 2 to 1 odds against the incumbent team.

Okay, let's break it here.

"[I]ndependent" polls, my ass!
The pan-blues will, in the pages of "Bulletgate" to come, quote surveys done by TVBS -- which might be better described as BS TV -- and the formerly affiliated Era News.

Anywhere, anytime, TVBS will jump at the chance to attack Chen Shui-bian, the Democratic Progressive Party, and anyone associated with them. If you could see TVBS every day, you'd know their true colors. They don't call China "China" -- they call it "Mainland China" or simply "the Mainland." By doing so, they're implying that Taiwan is part of China, just as people in Hawaii would be doing by referring to the contiguous 48 states on the U.S. "mainland." TVBS' usage of the word is no accident, for they are quite consistent about it, as a Chinese-language search of their site for terms like "China" (Hanyu pinyin: Zhong1 Guo2) or "mainland" (da4 lu4) will easily demonstrate.

As recently as January 5 and 6, 2005, TVBS published reports complaining of an "ass-kissing culture" in the Ministry of Education. You won't be surprised to know that the head of that department, Tu Cheng-sheng, was appointed by premier Yu Shyi-kun under the leadership of Chen Shui-bian.

On the day of Taiwan's 2004 presidential election, TVBS was planning to release the first exit poll. The article linked above says that "the margin of error for the poll was expected to be less than 1 per cent, but the station might withhold the results if they appeared inaccurate." Or do they mean "if they appeared to favor Chen Shui-bian"? Was this another attempt to deceive viewers and shape public opinion?

[See UPDATE at the bottom of this post for more election-related inaccuracy from TVBS.]

Separate but equally full of it
Era News is currently operated separately from TVBS, we can't know what's actually going on behind the scenes -- or can we?

On January 14, 2005, Era News ran something in their scrolling newsbar that said that [translation mine] "there was a 'high probability' that the European Parliament would lift the embargo on the sales of weapons to China." Ha! They voted to maintain the restrictions, "citing Beijing's threats against Taiwan as one of the key justifications." Not only that, but the vote -- which took place on January 13 -- went like this: "Ninety-nine members opposed for [sic] lifting the ban, 2 voted for opening arms sale, and 7 abstained from voting." Did Era News not know this, or were they and the rest of the pan-blue media trying to deceive the public?

Seeing the forest in spite of all those damn trees
Romanization.com lines up the results of six polls that were done in early March 2004 showing us that the Chen-Lu ticket was leading in half of those polls. That web site also tells us, "The average gap of 1.3% in favor of Lien was well within the standard margin of error of these polls, and there were substantial numbers of undecided voters in each poll."

Trailing by 5 to 10 percent, my ass!

More "reliable" sources?
Notice where else the pan-blues get their information: from "bookmakers" -- who may well be trying to influence the outcome of the election. Could the pan-blues possibly be the people you'd want making national policy decisions? Do you think they would draw up national defense plans based on feng shui? They just might! After all, they claim that feng shui helped them "win" the November legislative elections.

Back to the "Bulletgate" bullshit:

On the afternoon of March 19, the day before the balloting, incumbent Chen and his running mate Annette Lu were riding together in an open jeep, surrounded by over 1,400 security personnel and waving to well-wishers in downtown Tainan, Chen's hometown. In gross violation of security SOP which was followed that morning, Chen took off his bullet proof vest in the afternoon, and did not ride in a government vehicle with proper bulletproofing. Instead he rode in a plain jeep owned by a local politician, driven by an untrained private citizen. The jeep was not armor-plated. In serious breach of procedure, the country's No. 1 and 2 executives rode together in the same vehicle, standing side by side.

The cognitive development of a 3-year-old: "What we can't see can't hurt us"
If you are a parent or can remember that far back in your own life, you'll know that kids will cover their eyes or their heads in order to "protect themselves" from imaginary fears. As adults, our mental processes should be developed to a point where we realize that this doesn't work for reality. If I'm stuck on the train tracks with a train approaching at high speed, for example, simply covering my eyes won't make Mr. Choo-choo disappear.

Despite the danger of such thinking, this toddler-like mentality seems to be the standard approach the pan-blues take toward many things. This time around, it's information about bulletproof vests that they're hiding from.

Here's what I wrote about the lack of bulletproof vests back in Part 4 of this shootdown:

Although one might imagine it to be rather coincidental that Chen and Lu were shot just when they happened to be without bulletproof vests, there are other things to consider. They were in Chen's hometown of Tainan. It was a hot day.

Did Chen freqently wear a bulletproof vest prior to the shooting? This is something that might be good to consider when making accusations such as these. I wondered about it, and if the pan-blues were really interested in the "truth," they'd also be aware of this, which took all of two minutes to dig up:

Chen was not wearing his bulletproof vest, but he seldom does so even when he is not in his hometown, [Secretary General of the Presidential Office] Chiou [I-jen] said.

Chen has prided himself on being accessible to the public as part of Taiwan's flourishing democracy, also opening the Presidential Office building to the public on weekday mornings. [Emphasis mine]

Were Lien and Soong wearing bulletproof vests when they campaigned? I couldn't tell you, but it seems like a good question to ask. I do know that they complained about Chen Shui-bian's plans to use bulletproof glass at his May 20, 2004 inauguration (Would it make it too difficult to try to kill him again, or what?!), but they protested from behind bulletproof glass themselves.

The bullshit flies when the pan-blues aren't having fun. More from "Bulletgate":

At around 1:45 p. m., two shots were allegedly fired at them from a close distance amid a tumultuous welcoming scene, wounding them both. Ms. Lu was wounded in her right knee by a bullet, made of copper, which pierced through the windshield of the jeep. Mr. Chen suffered a grazing wound in his abdomen by a bullet, made of lead whose "surface nose is flat and big," "not a regular sharp-penetration-type design" and "powered by very small amount of powder," according to Dr. Henry Lee, the world-renowned forensic scientist, on a fact-finding visit to Taiwan in April. Inexplicably, for ten minutes, both Chen and Lu were not suspicious of their new wounds. Neither they nor the security personnel in and around the jeep heard the shots, or even noticed a fresh bullet hole on the windshield.

Tetrahydrocannabinol'll do that to ya, eh?
Not aware of their wounds "for ten minutes"? The KMT's own website published Lu's own explanation on April 10, 2004 as "[t]ranslated from local newspapers 5 April 2004." The Vice-President tells it like this [Emphasis mine]:

Suddenly I heard two big sounds like "Pong! Pong!", while smoke and shreds from firecracker wrappers made it hard for us to see. At that moment, I felt that something hit my right knee with tremendous force that hurt me very much. Immediately I yelled: "Oh ... it ... hurts so!"

That doesn't sound like "ten minutes" to me.

Back to the contents of "Bulletgate":

The chief Aide-de-Camp, who sat in the front passenger seat, ordered no security measures against further attacks. In fact, in nationwide television footage, he seemed totally oblivious to the alleged shooting. Later he admitted that he wore an earplug to seal off firecracker noise. Immediately after the alleged shooting, the police took no action to seal off the scene of the alleged crime, thus allowing all evidence to be lost to scientific investigation. Nor did the government order an immediate dragnet for the supposed gunmen, or increase vigilance at airports and fishing harbors to prevent their escape. To this day no suspect has been identified, and there have been no witnesses, though the alleged shooting took place in broad daylight, before live television cameras. In fact, Mr. Chen has not said one word of condemnation against the "assassin(s)."

Here are a few smidgens of truth surrounded by clouds of pan-blue concealment.

LARRY: "I can't see! I can't see!"
MOE: "Whatsamatta?!"
LARRY: "I got my eyes closed." [LINK]
No "dragnet or increased vigilance"? That's exactly what you'll see if you refuse to open your eyes. A Taipei Times article on January 1, 2005 wrapping up the top stories of the previous year says, "The increased security came as a result of the shooting of President Chen Shui-bian and Vice President Annette Lu in Tainan earlier that day."

See how it works? Just close your eyes, and the things that you are afraid of disappear. It's so simple, a 3-year-old child could do it!

Ah, if only real life were so simple.

Can I get a witness?!
Here's what I wrote about the pan-blues' ridiculous claims that "there have been no witnesses" back in Part 6 of this shootdown:

"[N]o witnesses"? According to Tainan Prosecutor Wang San-jung, quoted in a Taipei Times article from July 23, 2004, "investigators have interviewed everybody in the video, except the person in the grey shirt [whose] explanation and testimony are needed, because eight witnesses have testified against him." While this information wasn't revealed until after "Bulletgate" was published, its publishers drew their own conclusions, planted the seeds of suspicion in their supporters' minds, and fertilized them with the assistance of pan-blue media bullshit. [Emphasis added]

While that information is from last July, the pan-blues couldn't possibly not know that there were witnesses.

Did he or didn't he?
Is is true that Chen Shui-bian did "not sa[y] one word of condemnation against the "assassin(s)'"? You don't have to be his hairdresser to know the answer to this question! Speaking on behalf of the president, Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Secretary-General Chang Chun-hsiung said on the day of the shooting, "We condemn all violence and we urge all of our supporters to remain calm and pray for the health and well-being of the president and vice president." [Emphasis mine] If "all" isn't inclusive enough for the pan-blues, that's their own problem. This also demonstrates once again that it is the pan-blues who have "milked the shooting to maximum effect."

ON OTHER TOPICS:
Since my last post, it has been revealed that the hunt for the nonexistent weapons of mass destruction in Iraq is officially over, George W. Bush has expressed regret for saying dumbass things such as "bring 'em on," and things like "Rathergate" are perceived by the "dark side" as much more evil than, say, death squads. What a sick, twisted world.

NEXT UP: Ad nausuem, ad infinitum, ad diarrheum

UPDATE: Here's a repeat of something I posted back in Part 2 of this series:

* See the results of a very inaccurate TVBS survey in the runup to Taiwan's presidential election in 2000. (Actual outcome of that election: Chen Shui-bian: 4,977,697 votes (39.30%); James Soong: 4,664,972 votes (36.84%); Lien Chan: 2,925,513 votes (23.10%))

As I said: "BS TV."

When truth and justice bite you on the ass, just cry "unfair!"

How many lies can the pan-blues squeeze into a short paragraph, a few photos, and a simple caption? I'm about to show you.

They're hopeless, and page 12 of "Bulletgate" once again demonstrates this:

Hope for Justice

The opposition candidates, Lien Chan and James Soong, have filed a court procedure to nullify the results of the election due to these and many other irregularities. The following are some details on these crucial issues.

[Images of protesters crying and screaming while wearing headbands reading "jìng zùo." (literal translation: "quiet sit").]

[PHOTO CAPTION:] Photo montage from the weeks after Taiwan's 2004 Presidential Election: scenes of disbelief, anger, and sadness.

Perhaps the headbands should read instead, "Hi, I'm a walking contradiction!" How's that for "irregular"? Well, I suppose it jibes with their repeated references to their so-called "peaceful" protests.

In my Chinese-English dictionary, "jìng zùo" is actually translated as: "to sit still with a peaceful mind; to sit still as a form of therapy." Although I would not deny that the pan-blues need therapy, their protests were neither quiet nor peaceful. Go back to Part 7 of this shootdown to read an annotated laundry list of pan-blue violence.

Besides the ones we're shown in the "Bulletgate" photos, what other kinds of people were at these protests? Let's see. People pretending to be active military officers. Gangsters. Violent mobs. Go back to Part 8 of this shootdown to see how "irregular" the pan-blues are.

Recent history
A little over a week ago, Taiwan's High Court threw out the pan-blues' second lawsuit attempting to annul the results of the March 20, 2004 presidential election. The pan-blues were bitten on the ass, but it seems that they didn't even bother to turn around and see what bit them. That would be more painful than even the bite itself.

As I mentioned in an earlier post about this, the judge who presided over the case is an unabashed pan-blue supporter, yet the pan-blues are continually making nonsensical accusations that Chen Shui-bian controls the judiciary.

But wait! What about the "details" that page 12 of "Bulletgate" promised? Well, they're coming up in the next section, but as usual, you can rest assured that the few facts there will be floating in a cesspool of the sort of lies, distortions, and crackpot theories that arise from such desperation.

NEXT UP: All your surveys are belong to us

Get out your synonyms

Didn't they just call it a "Referendum Without a Cause" on the previous page? Well, the rogues are saying it again on page 11 -- they're just using different words:

[BACKGROUND IMAGE: A sepia-toned photo of the post-election protesters. Signs in English read, "Shame on A-bian," "Shame on DPP's Dirty Election," "Government Conspiracy," "Judiciary Recount," "Fake Assassinate" (sic), A-bian V.S. (sic) People Power." Signs in Chinese read, "Democracy yes, dictatorship no," "Taiwan's angry roar," "My 'emperor' A-bian: decree a recount," etc.]

[SUPERIMPOSED TEXT:] Meaningless Referendum

The two topics, decided on far after Chen decided to stage the referendum on the same day as the Presidential election, left much to be desired in terms of coherence, feasibility or even necessity:

1. Vote Yes or No on this statement:
"The people of Taiwan insist that the Taiwan Straits problem should be resolved peacefully. If the Chinese Communists don't disable their missiles that are aimed at Taiwan, if they don't abandon the use of violence against Taiwan, do you agree that the government buy more missile equipment, to enhance Taiwan's self-defense capability?"

2. Vote Yes or No on this statement:
"Do you agree that the government open talks with the Chinese Communists, to push toward the development of a peaceful and balanced dynamic structure to search for consensus between the two sides of the Straits and the happiness of the people?"

Well, that doesn't add anything to their argument, does it? And to argue against their framing of the referendum questions on this page, I'd merely be repeating Part 11 of this shootdown. But that's not to imply that there's nothing to be said.

Get out your microscopes
Let's take a closer look at the pan-blues' words: "[The referendum] left much to be desired in terms of coherence, feasibility or even necessity."

As if they would know about any of those things!

For your consideration
The "immediate recount" the pan-blues were demanding even before the election results were officially announced wasn't in accordance with the law. Only an emperor or a dictator could "decree" such a thing! So, is Chen Shui-bian an emperor/dictator, or isn't he?

Ah, who needs "coherence"? Obviously not the pan-blues. They can just "roar" instead!

Yeah, but is it doable?
What about "feasability"? Well, there was a budget drawn up during KMT rule for the purchase of defensive weapons from the U.S. Chen Shui-bian is currently trying to implement this budget, but the pan-blues are continually blocking him. This is only making the situation more dire. But what do the pan-blues know about "necessity"?

The "bear" necessities
Their own protests would only have been a "necessity" if they had first waited for the election results to be officially announced (and hadn't tried to interrupt the announcement by rioting), then requested a recount, and then been denied a recount.

All patience must wait outside
But they couldn't wait. They rioted first and didn't ask questions. They still got their recount -- a recount of all the votes, not just those for the Chen-Lu ticket -- with representatives from both sides observing, but it didn't change who won. The few votes that changed were the result of mistakes, not fraud.

The whole way along, the pan-blues have cried, "No truth, no president." Yet those damn facts always seem to be "biased" against them.

What do the pan-blues know about "truth"?

Get out your Post-It notes ('cuz here are some reminders):
* The referendum law was passed by the pan-blue dominated legislature.
* It gave the president the right to decide when a referendum was necessary.
* Chen Shui-bian followed the pan-blue-approved referendum law in deciding upon one which didn't include -- Tiananmen forbid -- the taboo topic of "Taiwan independence."
* The final wording of the referendum questions was submitted to the U.S. (for "approval"?) before they were announced.
* The pan-blues illegally told people not to vote in the referendum. I received one of their "instructional" flyers in my own mailbox.
* The referendum failed, yet the pan-blues still use this to cry that the election was "Unfair!"

Get out your handkerchiefs, ya crybabies!

SEMI-RELATED LINK:
* The Devil's Dictionary, online

NEXT UP: "Just ice" for hot-headed "meditators"