Spies like them, they like spies?
Hosts of a pro-independence radio show called "Taiwanese Club" (台灣人俱樂部) are asking for some necessary housecleaning to be done within Taiwan's Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), and this sounds like something I can agree with. Yesterday's Taipei Times detailed the hosts' "Surgical Blade Action" (手術刀) campaign:

The action was aimed at members of the DPP's former New Tide faction -- such as former legislators Tuan Yi-kang (段宜康), Lee Wen-chung (李文忠) and Lin Cho-shui (林濁水), and Legislators Hong Chi-chang (洪奇昌) and Shen Fa-hui (沈發惠) -- who are known for their outspokenness, and for finding fault with the party's action and rhetoric.

Former legislators Lo Wen-chia (羅文嘉) and Shen Fu-hsiung (沈富雄) and Legislator Kuo Jeng-liang (郭正亮), all of whom do not belong to the faction, were also targeted because they have often criticized the party.

In a recording posted on the campaign's official Web log, one of the hosts nicknamed "A-sheng" (阿生) said: "Many party officials made comments that broke [DPP] supporters' hearts at critical moments. We, as DPP supporters, have put up [with their comments] for a long time. It's time to show our anger."

"If they are the party's nominees or candidates for national constituency in next year's legislative election, we will not vote for them. The DPP is going to lose some [legislative] seats," he added.

The enemies within
It's about time. If the entire group isn't spies running black ops for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) or even China, they might as well be, and their foul odor has been stinking up the place for way too long already.

What have they done to deserve this?
It's not just about "criticism." In case you're unaware, here are a couple of the things which put these so-called "light greens" clearly in the "blue-to-deep blue" category:

* Tuan Yi-kang was on Tuesday night's "Talking Show" (大話新聞) attempting to defend his criticism of the DPP. One argument that he made was that the China Times had "misquoted" him. However, he didn't complain about their supposed misquote until host Cheng Hung-yi asked him about it, and furthermore, he did little to counter the accusation. Finally, he could only hem and haw as to why he kept giving interviews to the China Times when they had repeatedly -- in his own words -- "misquoted" him. To me, that paints him as quite "un-green."

* Whenever Lin Cho-shui appears on TV, I wonder what anti-DPP talking points he's going to spew and why at that point in time. Just about two weeks ago he had this to say, "I don't see any reason to oppose the three direct links or why the [current China-bound investment] cap of 40 percent [of a company's net value], which I had ten years ago, is still in existence." I saw Lin recently on former New Party legislator Kao Hui-yu's (高惠宇) talk show "Hui-yu Looks at the World" (惠宇看天下), and there didn't seem to be a smidgen of disagreement between them. He'll abuse any chance to kick the DPP when they're already being attacked by the opposition. Green? My ass!

* Shen Fu-hsiung (AKA "Taiwan's Joe Lieberman"), who always seems to be talking at people down his nose and over his shoulder, "doesn't regret becoming business partners with dedicated unificationists" Dr. Timothy Ting (丁庭宇) of the fake "Gallup Taiwan" organization and UFO Radio chairman Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康). They were partners, by the way, "in a polling company joint venture." I can't determine if it's one and the same with the fake Gallup, but there isn't a speck of green to be found on Shen's side of the fence.

Here's a much longer and more detailed list (Hanzi) of why this housecleaning is necessary.

Does this have anything to do with "criticism," "discussion," or "press freedom"?
In response to a counterattack on Luo Wen-chia by others within the DPP for what was at best some poorly-timed criticism, Luo said on his personal blog, "Has our society become so crazy that there is no room for reasonable discussion?" That question baits the reader with a false argument. To rephrase the question better, I'd ask, "Does Luo's criticism count as reasonable discussion?"

My own answer is a resounding "No!" and here's why. When I have suggestions or criticism of people I consider to be on my side, I try to present them in private -- not in speeches on the other side of the world to be broadcast by ETTV, as Luo did, or in interviews with the mendacious China Times, as Tuan did. Those types of things most certainly don't count as "reasonable discussion." These guys have done this repeatedly, and it's high time it stops.

DPP chairman Yu Shyi-kun just announced a "boycott" of the China Times. Today's Taipei Times says that the DPP will "refuse [China Times reporters] access to party officials." Although the article doesn't mention Tuan Yi-kang, it does bring up a case where the China Times "claimed that Yu used the pejorative term 'Chinese pigs' to refer to anti-President-Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) protesters in a front page story on Sept. 25." Even though the China Times acknowledged that the article's accusations were "groundless," Yu continued with his lawsuit against the paper.

The China Times' response to Yu's statement yesterday reveals much about their own position. As told by the Taipei Times: "In an official statement issued late last night, the China Times said that [Yu's] comments would be regarded as slander." My interpretation: "We can lie about you, but if you stop talking to us because of it, it's slander." Don't try too hard wrapping your brain around that. It's absolute nonsense!

The above article goes on to show the China Times defending those within the DPP who are apparently friendly with that paper. (See the subsection headed "Damaging.") Excise those names from the DPP roster before the 2007 legislative election gets too near. They won't be missed.

---

Refuse and resisters: Taiwan, 台灣, media, 媒體, China Times, 中國時報, Timothy Ting, 丁庭宇, Shen Fu-hsiung, 沈富雄, Tuan Yi-kang, 段宜康, Lin Cho-shui, 林濁水, Luo Wen-chia, 羅文嘉

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!