About the Blogmaster
Tim Maddog was abducted by aliens several years ago and is now secretly blogging from an island where even the domestic media doesn't know its name.
Before his abduction he helped to create The Sedition Commission, actively opposed an infamous racist political candidate, hosted his very own weekly radio show (where he was threatened by backers of the aforementioned candidate), and fought the College Republicans singlehandedly. During the 1980s and 90s he published the 'zine Vital Information.
Tim Maddog is an atheist, a vegetarian, a non-drinker, and a bicyclist. If you don't use your rear view mirror when driving alongside him, he will rip it off of your car with his bare hands. If you're an extra-large uniformed soldier, and you crash your motorcycle into him, be prepared for an ass-whoopin'. He's a Maddog! On the other hand, if you smile at him, he'll smile back at you. (See more on my Blogger profile)
The name of the rap?
The name of this blog comes from the title of a rap done by Tim Maddog on The Sedition Commission's An Ambient Boot to the Head. Listen to it online here.
Maddog Quotes
* Question everything -- especially this.
* My race is human. What's yours?
* They cannot control us!
* Part of the real secret is that "us" includes you.
* Ignorance is bliss, and I'm pissed.
* I only eat live meat.
* Everything in moderation -- even moderation itself. (...though I'm apparently not the first to have said it.)
Search INDIAC
The Best of INDIAC
- The 9 lives of "Chemical Ali"
- Kill, kill, kill
- SOP: Don't ask questions
- The vapor trails of 9/11
- Grilling Gilligan
- Botox as a WMD
- The truth about "mint tea"
- Why we write
- Wu'er Kaixi's lobotomy
- "Ethnic divisiveness" in Taiwan
- Shooting down "Bulletgate": i, ii, iii, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6, Part 7, Part 8, Part 9, Part 10, Part 11, Part 12, Part 13, Part 14, Part 15, Part 16, Part 17 (and even more to come!)
- - - - - - - - - - -
Links
- 228 Massacre in US Media
- A-Changin' Times
- Adbusters
- Altercation
- AlterNet
- AmericaBlog
- Anarchist Defense League
- Anarchy: A Journal of Desire Armed
- Atrios' Eschaton
- BartCop Political Commentary
- Black Box Voting
- Bloggence, Cunning, Exile
- Bloggers In Taiwan
- Boondocks
- Buck Fush
- Bush Lies
- Bush Recall
- Bushflash
- BuyBlue.org
- BuzzFlash
- Center for American Progress
- Choose the Blue
- Clever Claire
- Crooks and Liars
- Cursor
- Democracy Now!
- Democratic Forum Bush Polls
- Democratic Underground
- Disinfopedia
- Doubting to Shuo
- Dreams of Life
- Enemy of the Earth
- Factsheet5
- FAIR (Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting)
- Free Inquiry
- From the Wilderness
- Get Your War On
- GNN (Guerrilla News Network)
- Independent Media Center
- Information Clearing House
- Jerome F. Keating's Writings
- Joe Conason
- Life of Brian
- London Calling
- Media Matters for America
- Michael Moore
- My Blahg
- NORML
- One Whole Jujuflop Situation
- Pagebao
- Politics & Science
- Public Library of Science
- Reverend Mykeru
- Rotten.com - Conspiracies
- SullyWatch
- Sutton Impact (formerly "Schlock'N'Roll")
- Taiwan Blog Feed
- Taiwan Today
- Take Back the Media
- Ted Rall
- The Hutton Inquiry
- The Levitator
- The Lost Spaceman
- The Memory Hole
- The Poison Dart
- The Rude Pundit
- The Taiwan Library Online
- The View from Taiwan
- The Wayback Machine
- Think Progress
- This Modern World
- THOMAS
- Today's Front Pages
- Troubletown
- TomPaine.com
- Wandering to Tamshui
- What Really Happened
- WhiteHouse.org
- Wikipedia
- Working for Change
- Google News
- - - - - - - - - - -
My Taiwan shitlist
Be careful with these motherfuckers who disguise themselves as "journalists." They're armed with memes like "renegade province" and aren't afraid to use them. If any of 'em ever see me, they'd better get on the other side of the fucking street.
Why do they hate Taiwan?
- Mike "I want my KMT" Chinoy
- William "Bulletgate" Pesek, Jr.
- Keith "Dime Novel" Bradsher
- Bevin "Anti-War (except when it comes to Taiwan)" Chu
INDIAC Archives
- January 2000
- July 2003
- August 2003
- September 2003
- October 2003
- November 2003
- December 2003
- January 2004
- February 2004
- March 2004
- April 2004
- May 2004
- June 2004
- July 2004
- August 2004
- September 2004
- October 2004
- November 2004
- December 2004
- January 2005
- February 2005
- March 2005
- April 2005
- May 2005
- June 2005
- July 2005
- August 2005
- September 2005
- October 2005
- November 2005
- December 2005
- January 2006
- February 2006
- March 2006
- April 2006
- May 2006
- June 2006
- July 2006
- August 2006
- September 2006
- October 2006
- November 2006
- December 2006
- January 2007
- February 2007
- March 2007
- May 2007
- June 2007
- July 2007
- August 2007
- September 2007
- October 2007
- December 2007
- January 2008
- February 2008
- March 2008
- April 2008
- May 2008
- June 2008
- July 2008
- August 2008
- September 2008
- October 2008
- November 2008
- December 2008
- January 2009
- February 2009
- March 2009
- April 2009
- May 2009
- June 2009
- July 2009
- August 2009
- September 2009
- October 2009
- November 2009
- December 2009
- January 2010
- February 2010
- March 2010
- April 2010
- May 2010
- June 2010
- July 2010
- August 2010
- November 2010
- December 2010
- February 2011
- August 2011
- February 2016
"Pay close attention to that man behind the curtain!"
Sunday, November 12, 2006
BBC cooks up more nonsense about Chen recall bid
Babble without a byline
In a BBC article of Friday, November 10, 2006 titled "New recall bill tabled in Taiwan," someone (since there's no byline, we don't know who) was paid to cook up this dreck and pass it off as reporting:
1) While all of the "[l]egislators" did indeed set the date for the recall vote, the ones who tabled it in the first place just happen to be comprised entirely of opposition legislators. Both the DPP and the TSU have said they'd back President Chen. Did the BBC not know this, or are they only reporting what CTiTV feeds them? Either way would reflect negatively on their trustworthiness.
2) Such a referendum would most certainly not read "Do you want to 'get rid of' President Chen?" (If you think that I'm being picky, thank your bleedin' lucky stars I'm ignoring the lack of a subjunctive case in that conditional crap.)
3) As Michael Turton has pointed out previously, Chen didn't merely "survive" the first two recalls. The fact is that both of those attempts failed miserably to reach the two-thirds majority necessary to make it past the legislature before a public referendum could even be held on the matter.
We've only just begun
Pushing forward, let's see what other muck the unidentified chef has thrown into the pot.
4) Let's talk about "claims" first. Some people claim to be messiahs. A claim isn't necessarily the truth and shouldn't be judged as being so just because it comes from someone with the title of "prosecutor." I bet it would be pretty easy to track down someone to find a balancing quote. Oh, bugger! There's nobody available in the CTiTV studios? Darn. Maybe next time.
5) By the way, these claims have nothing to do with whether or not it will "be tougher" for Chen to avoid being recalled. Could it be the BBC's unstated goal to make it "tougher"?
6) President Chen said he would waive immunity and step down immediately if his wife, Wu Shu-jen (alternate spelling above) were found guilty. Don't forget that the prosecutor had agreed to do another interview of Wu on November 5 to allow her to clarify some things, but he went ahead with the indictment anyway before that date; thus the interview never happened.
7) Liars, thieves, and convicted criminals are among those leading the "[o]pposition supporters." Not surprisingly, some anti-Chen people in Hong Kong and China can hardly be distinguished from those oxymoronically-named folks.
Keeping up appearances of truthiness
Whoever is writing this finally gets around to mentioning some of the things that should have been presented simultaneously with the information above, but it does little to make up for the damage. Here we have a dash of subheading and five more scant paragraphs, only one of which exceeds a single sentence:
8) The chance of 14 DPP members voting for the recall is slim to none. If any do, it could only be people like Lin Cho-shui or Tuan Yi-kang who should have been kicked out of the DPP long ago for repeatedly kicking the party from within while it's being attacked from without. Those people seem to be in it for other reasons (spies?) and should probably not be painted as ever having had faith in Chen.
9) It wasn't just the DPP who "stood by" Chen. The TSU also showed their disapproval of the motion by casting null ballots in both the first and second votes. Although there is some strong disagreement between those two parties, both of them stand strongly for democracy.
10) "Analysts say..." (insert any claim here). Finish that with "the big question now is..." and what I see is a magician saying "Look at my hands!" Are you watching closely? Which analysts? Can the BBC name even one or tell the readers who they're affiliated with? Could these "analysts" be from places like CTiTV or TVBS? Perhaps it's Emile Sheng yet again. (Am I close?!) As I've mentioned, the DPP and TSU have already made formal statements saying they would oppose this recall motion. Can you feel the bullshit vapors wafting upward toward your nostrils yet?
11) "[C]orrespondents say..." (insert any claim here). Maddog says, "Bollocks!" You might as well type, "I'm making this up." Could this be "Caroline Gluck, distorting from Taipei"? Why do "[m]ost DPP members" merely "seem" to support "their leader." (Note to Ms. Gluck and everybody at the BBC: He's the democratically-elected president, not just a "leader." Stick that someplace where you can easily copy and paste it.)
12) The full name of the "Nationalist Party" to which our fully-unnamed writer refers is the "Chinese Nationalist Party," also known as the KMT or Kuomintang. Trying to make it harder to Google up their long history of murder and oppression, eh? Nice try.
Where do we go from here?
They distort, you decide. Is this the work of Caroline Gluck? Hers has been the only name appearing on any of the recent articles from Taiwan which do have a byline. Why no byline on this article and so many others (some of which contain Gluck's name within), and does this lack of bylines have anything to do with Michael's and my deconstruction of her so-called "journalism"? Could she be farming out the work to local pan-blue hacks? Is the BBC biased against Taiwan and/or Chen Shui-bian and/or the pan-greens?
Sound off!
If your thinking is anything like mine, drop them a line (via either e-mail or online form), and tell them why.
Pieces of the puzzle: Taiwan, 台灣, Chen Shui-bian, 陳水扁, A-bian, 阿扁, Wu Shu-jen, Wu Shu-chen, 吳淑珍, media, 媒體, BBC, 英國廣播公司, Caroline Gluck, 凱若琳葛拉克, Kuomintang, 中國國民黨, KMT, 國民黨
Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!
In a BBC article of Friday, November 10, 2006 titled "New recall bill tabled in Taiwan," someone (since there's no byline, we don't know who) was paid to cook up this dreck and pass it off as reporting:
Legislators in Taiwan have set the date for a third vote on a recall bill aimed at ousting President Chen Shui-bian.If it doesn't look like dreck, you're either not looking carefully enough, or you don't have the proper knowledge. You might also think that in three one-sentence paragraphs there couldn't be too many foul-ups there, huh? Not so fast! Let's see how many I can extract.
The vote is scheduled for 24 November, and if the motion passes it will trigger a national referendum on whether to get rid of the president.
Mr Chen has survived two such votes before, and looks likely to again.
1) While all of the "[l]egislators" did indeed set the date for the recall vote, the ones who tabled it in the first place just happen to be comprised entirely of opposition legislators. Both the DPP and the TSU have said they'd back President Chen. Did the BBC not know this, or are they only reporting what CTiTV feeds them? Either way would reflect negatively on their trustworthiness.
2) Such a referendum would most certainly not read "Do you want to 'get rid of' President Chen?" (If you think that I'm being picky, thank your bleedin' lucky stars I'm ignoring the lack of a subjunctive case in that conditional crap.)
3) As Michael Turton has pointed out previously, Chen didn't merely "survive" the first two recalls. The fact is that both of those attempts failed miserably to reach the two-thirds majority necessary to make it past the legislature before a public referendum could even be held on the matter.
We've only just begun
Pushing forward, let's see what other muck the unidentified chef has thrown into the pot.
But this time the challenge will be tougher, in the light of prosecutors' claims that they have enough evidence to charge him with corruption.Three more one-sentence paragraphs, and I see at least as many distortions. Follow along, and see how hollow those words are.
Mr Chen cannot be prosecuted while in office, as he is protected by presidential immunity, but his wife, Wu Shu-chen, and three ex-aides have already been charged with the misuse of state funds.
Opposition supporters are continuing their demands for Mr Chen to step down over the crisis.
4) Let's talk about "claims" first. Some people claim to be messiahs. A claim isn't necessarily the truth and shouldn't be judged as being so just because it comes from someone with the title of "prosecutor." I bet it would be pretty easy to track down someone to find a balancing quote. Oh, bugger! There's nobody available in the CTiTV studios? Darn. Maybe next time.
5) By the way, these claims have nothing to do with whether or not it will "be tougher" for Chen to avoid being recalled. Could it be the BBC's unstated goal to make it "tougher"?
6) President Chen said he would waive immunity and step down immediately if his wife, Wu Shu-jen (alternate spelling above) were found guilty. Don't forget that the prosecutor had agreed to do another interview of Wu on November 5 to allow her to clarify some things, but he went ahead with the indictment anyway before that date; thus the interview never happened.
7) Liars, thieves, and convicted criminals are among those leading the "[o]pposition supporters." Not surprisingly, some anti-Chen people in Hong Kong and China can hardly be distinguished from those oxymoronically-named folks.
Keeping up appearances of truthiness
Whoever is writing this finally gets around to mentioning some of the things that should have been presented simultaneously with the information above, but it does little to make up for the damage. Here we have a dash of subheading and five more scant paragraphs, only one of which exceeds a single sentence:
Keeping up the pressureBefore you even think about taking even a tiny bite of what has just been served up, here are my closing arguments.
The opposition parties, which have a small majority in parliament, will need at least 14 ruling party members to back the recall motion in order for it to succeed.
The last two attempts - in June and October - failed as all Mr Chen's Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) colleagues stood by him.
Analysts say the big question now is whether the prosecutors' conclusions last Friday will cause some DPP lawmakers to lose faith in their leader and vote in favour of the recall motion.
So far, correspondents say, it appears likely that the vote will again fail. Most DPP members seem to be loyal to their leader, and the party has said it will punish any legislators who vote against Mr Chen.
"The chances of [the bill] [<-that's the BBC's] passing are low," admitted opposition Nationalist Party legislator Tsai Cheng-yuan, but he added that even if it did not pass, his party would still keep up the pressure against Mr Chen.
8) The chance of 14 DPP members voting for the recall is slim to none. If any do, it could only be people like Lin Cho-shui or Tuan Yi-kang who should have been kicked out of the DPP long ago for repeatedly kicking the party from within while it's being attacked from without. Those people seem to be in it for other reasons (spies?) and should probably not be painted as ever having had faith in Chen.
9) It wasn't just the DPP who "stood by" Chen. The TSU also showed their disapproval of the motion by casting null ballots in both the first and second votes. Although there is some strong disagreement between those two parties, both of them stand strongly for democracy.
10) "Analysts say..." (insert any claim here). Finish that with "the big question now is..." and what I see is a magician saying "Look at my hands!" Are you watching closely? Which analysts? Can the BBC name even one or tell the readers who they're affiliated with? Could these "analysts" be from places like CTiTV or TVBS? Perhaps it's Emile Sheng yet again. (Am I close?!) As I've mentioned, the DPP and TSU have already made formal statements saying they would oppose this recall motion. Can you feel the bullshit vapors wafting upward toward your nostrils yet?
11) "[C]orrespondents say..." (insert any claim here). Maddog says, "Bollocks!" You might as well type, "I'm making this up." Could this be "Caroline Gluck, distorting from Taipei"? Why do "[m]ost DPP members" merely "seem" to support "their leader." (Note to Ms. Gluck and everybody at the BBC: He's the democratically-elected president, not just a "leader." Stick that someplace where you can easily copy and paste it.)
12) The full name of the "Nationalist Party" to which our fully-unnamed writer refers is the "Chinese Nationalist Party," also known as the KMT or Kuomintang. Trying to make it harder to Google up their long history of murder and oppression, eh? Nice try.
Where do we go from here?
They distort, you decide. Is this the work of Caroline Gluck? Hers has been the only name appearing on any of the recent articles from Taiwan which do have a byline. Why no byline on this article and so many others (some of which contain Gluck's name within), and does this lack of bylines have anything to do with Michael's and my deconstruction of her so-called "journalism"? Could she be farming out the work to local pan-blue hacks? Is the BBC biased against Taiwan and/or Chen Shui-bian and/or the pan-greens?
Sound off!
If your thinking is anything like mine, drop them a line (via either e-mail or online form), and tell them why.
Pieces of the puzzle: Taiwan, 台灣, Chen Shui-bian, 陳水扁, A-bian, 阿扁, Wu Shu-jen, Wu Shu-chen, 吳淑珍, media, 媒體, BBC, 英國廣播公司, Caroline Gluck, 凱若琳葛拉克, Kuomintang, 中國國民黨, KMT, 國民黨
Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!