It's Not Democracy, It's A Conspiracy!

Ma Ying-jeou government under fire again

2011-08-03T03:21:00.000+08:00

As time moves forward, Ma's administration moves backward

A group of 39 observers of Taiwanese politics from around the world -- many of whom were part of an earlier series of open letters on the erosion of justice in Taiwan under the Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) government -- is in the news yet again. This time, they're focusing on the indictment against former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝).

Here's some of the main content [highlights mine]:

Dear President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九),

We the undersigned, international academics, analysts and writers from the US, Canada, Europe and Australia, have for many years been keen observers of political developments in Taiwan. We were delighted when Taiwan made its transition to democracy in the late 1980s and early 1990s, and we continue to care deeply for the country and its future as a free and democratic nation-state.

However, during the past three years, many of us have felt it necessary to address publicly our concerns to you about the erosion of justice and democracy in Taiwan, most recently in April this year regarding the charges of the "36,000 missing documents" against a number of prominent former Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) officials. We raised these issues as international supporters of Taiwan's democracy.

At this time we express our deep concern about the charges against former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝), often referred to as "the father of Taiwan's democracy," who was indicted on June 30 on charges of allegedly channeling US$7.8 million from secret diplomatic funds into the Taiwan Research Institute. These charges and their timing raise a number of questions that are related both to the case itself and the integrity of the judicial system in Taiwan.

After detailing the specific questions (which you can read at the link above) -- the first of which mentions that the charges stem from events which took place about 15 years ago -- the letter continues [highlights mine]:

Mr President, as head of state you bear overall responsibility for the state of affairs in Taiwan. In democratic systems, proper checks and balances between the executive, legislative and judiciary branches are of the utmost importance. The executive and the legislative branches have a responsibility to exercise oversight and to balance activism in the judiciary, just as the judiciary serves a similar role with regard to the executive and legislative branches. Stating that your government abides by "judicial independence" is therefore not enough. It is essential that all participants in the judicial process — prosecutors, judges and lawyers — are fully imbued with the basic principle that the judiciary is scrupulously impartial and not given to any partisan preferences.

We, as members of the international academic community, are left with the impression that the indictments and practices of the judiciary in Taiwan over the past three years reflect a judicial system that is increasingly influenced by political considerations. There has been a regression in the accomplishments of Taiwan's momentous democratization of the 1990s and 2000s. As good friends of Taiwan, we are deeply unsettled by this. It undermines Taiwan's international image as a free and democratic nation.

Mr President, we therefore urge you and your government to ensure that the judicial system is held to the highest standards of objectivity and fairness. Taiwan has many challenges ahead of it and it cannot afford the political divisions created by the use of the judicial system for political purposes.

Respectfully yours,
[the undersigned]

You can say that again (and they probably will)!

Some of the prequels
Don't forget the earlier parts of this long-running series, listed here in chronological order:

* November 6, 2008: Scholars and writers from around the world publish an "Open letter on erosion of justice in Taiwan." The same letter -- as an online petition -- was signed by more than 2,000 people. (The petition is now closed.)

* November 25, 2008: Minister of Justice Wang Ching-feng (王清峰) calls the open letter "inaccurate."

* December 2, 2008: "Eroding justice: Open letter No. 2" counters Wang Ching-feng's claims.

* January 8, 2009: Over a month later, Wang Ching-feng comes up with "clarif[ications]" regarding the open-letter writers' so-called "misunderstandings."

* January 21, 2009: "Eroding justice: Open letter No. 3" is addressed to President Ma Ying-jeou.

* January 24, 2009: Two more "US-based Taiwan experts add [their] names to open letter [No. 3]."

* January 25, 2009: President Ma claims the public had gained confidence in the judiciary in 2008 -- the exact opposite of what this Taiwan News article tells us they actually felt:
According to recent surveys conducted by Academia Sinica and the Web site Yahoo! Kimo, over 50 percent of the people do not believe in Taiwan's judicial system and over 75 percent have no confidence that the Judicial Yuan will undertake judicial reform [...]
* May 22, 2009: An estimable group of scholars and writers -- 26 in all, and each one with a deep understanding of Taiwan and the surrounding facts -- has composed an open letter addressed directly to President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九). The letter addresses the ever-increasing problems with judicial fairness, press freedom, the lack of transparency in the Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) rapprochement with China, the loss of Taiwan's sovereignty, and the loss of human rights. The argument the letter makes is rock solid. It is based on demonstrable facts.

* November 9, 2009: Then there were 31. The Taiwan News publishes an "Open letter to President Ma Ying-jeou by 30 international scholars" which reminds us that "a decrease of tension across the Taiwan Strait would indeed be welcome, but [...] that this should not be done at the expense of the hard-won democracy" and that "Taiwan should be more fully accepted by the international community as a full and equal partner." (Here's a version with 31 names on the web site of one of the signatories, Jerome F. Keating, Ph.D.)

* December 13, 2009: Government Information Office (GIO) Minister Su Jun-pin (蘇俊賓) submits the "GIO response to Nov. [9] open letter" to the Taipei Times.

* December 25, 2009: Richard Kagan, professor emeritus at Hamline University in St Paul, Minnesota and one of the signatories of the November 2009 letter, replies to Su Jun-pin's silliness in "GIO's response misses the point"

* January 8, 2010: Government Information Office (GIO) Minister Su Jun-pin (蘇俊賓) churns out A GIO response to Richard Kagan (one of the signatories of the November 9, 2009 "Open letter to President Ma Ying-jeou by 30 international scholars") in which Su compares apples and oranges by imagining that other people don't know that China wants to annex Taiwan while the Taiwanese people don't want to be part of China, ignores what has happened to Hong Kong in the past 12 and a half years, talks about the "double-taxation" issue as if China won't still get those taxes from Taiwanese businesses, pretends to forget that Taiwan's Straits [sic] Exchange Foundation (海峽交流基金會) chairman and Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) vice-chairman Chiang Pin-kung (江丙坤) referred to himself as a "rubber stamp," complains that his government has no control over anything, ignores the KMT's continued attempts to take over Taiwan's Public TV (PTS, 公共電視), confuses gains in local elections with a balanced legislature and a president who listens to majority opinion without oppressing minorities or stupidly saying out loud that he "sees them as humans," and completely omits the fact that the talks regarding an Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) -- which Chinese officials say "will certainly bring about complete unification of the motherland [sic] -- have been anything but transparent and have not been subject to legislative oversight. These things, Mr. Su, are clear signs of an erosion of both justice and democracy.

* February 9, 2010: Michael Danielsen, one of the signatories of the Open letter to President Ma Ying-jeou last November, rebuts Su Jun-pin's response to Richard Kagan last month by pointing out that Democratic liberty is fundamental, "look[ing] forward to actual steps [by Su and the Ma government] that go beyond mere words."

* April 11, 2011: Another open letter criticizes the government's charges that 17 former DPP officials are responsible for "'failing to return' about 36,000 documents during the DPP administration" which ended almost three years earlier.

* April 14, 2011: In what is hard not to perceive as intimidation, the Foreign Ministry says it's going to probe this latest open letter, with Ma officials implying along the way that some of the writers were not of sound mind.

* April 17, 2011: The Chinese-language Liberty Times (自由時報) notices the intimidation factor: "The Liberty Times Editorial: KMT uses law as a political weapon."

* April 22, 2011: The Taipei Times draws a similar conclusion: "EDITORIAL: Government starts to sound like PRC."

I can already imagine how the Ma government will respond the latest letter.

How long can this continue? As long as Taiwanese allow the Chinese KMT to hold political power, it will just keep going and going and going.

Unsealing utensils: Taiwan, 台灣, open letter, 公開信, erosion of justice, 侵蝕司法, Ma Ying-jeou, 馬英九, Chinese Nationalist Party, 中國國民黨, Kuomintang, KMT, 國民黨, Lee Teng-hui, 李登輝

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!

My thoughts on February 28, 2011

2011-02-28T23:18:00.002+08:00

Lest we forget the 228 Massacre (二二八大屠殺) of 1947

What am I thinking about on this 64th anniversary of one of the most horrific events in Taiwan's history?

I'm remembering with dismay that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is still in power -- even after behaving as colonizers for over six decades -- because they still use illicit methods to get elected. Here are some examples:

* Vote buying is rampant even within their own party's Central Standing Committee, but they keep putting the guilty ones right back in.

* In the January 2010 legislative by-elections, "Two of the three seats up for grabs […] in Taoyuan, Taichung and Taitung counties were left vacant by former KMT legislators found guilty of vote-buying," reminding us of their "tradition of buying votes."

* Lee Min-yung (李敏勇) reminds readers: "The roots of vote-buying can be found in the Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) long hold on power and its system for distributing the spoils of government."

* Laurence Eyton enlightens in a 2004 piece in the Asia Times Online: "[The Chinese KMT] has traditionally used its wealth to engage in what it calls 'traditional electoral practices', ie vote buying […]"

I'm reminded that the Chinese KMT still uses thuggery to maintain their power. Here are some examples:

* When disgraced former Toronto-based Government Information Office (GIO) official Kuo Kuan-ying (郭冠英) returned to Taiwan, he was picked up at airport and "assisted" by thugs in black shirts assigned by Bamboo Union (竹聯幫) gang leader Chang An-le (張安樂).

* People wearing black T-shirts and vests bearing the name of the Matsu Temple (大天后宮) physically remove college students from a protest against the Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) government's policies regarding students from China.

* Despite denials by police, experience should tell you who the guys in the black shirts helping to defend Chinese envoy Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) are.

* Read my post about the movie "Formosa Betrayed," which dramatizes real incidents involving the Chinese KMT, including their use of gangsters to carry out the assassination of a political dissident on American soil.

I'm reminded that the Chinese KMT is still distorting history. Here are some examples:

* A Taipei Times editorial reminds readers about Ma's empty promises: "So much for saying that the memorial hall [renaming] issue was 'not a pressing matter.'"

* Here's a photo of a display from the renovated 228 Memorial Museum which paints former dictator Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) as "recovering … order" instead of as being the perpetrator of the massacre.

* Exhibits at the newly-renovated museum paint peaceful protesters as "mobs."

* President Ma pretends that the Chinese KMT has "dealt with its past" to the same extent the government of Germany has done since World War II.

* On the blog of Taipei City councilor Chien Yu-yen (簡余晏) you can read some of the details (Hanzi) and see photos (containing Hanzi text and a little bit of English) and video (Taiwanese and Mandarin audio, Hanzi text and a little bit of English) detailing some of the changes to the museum.

And I'm reminded that while Chinese KMT chairman Ma Ying-jeou -- elected as Taiwan's president in 2008 on a promise of "no unification, no independence and no use of force" (不統、不獨、不武) -- has long claimed to support democracy, he still doesn't. Here are some examples:

* Remember the days when Ma was publicly against direct presidential elections.

* Remember when the Chinese KMT boycotted their own referendum about Taiwan's participation in the United Nations.

* The Executive Yuan's (行政院) Referendum Review Committee (公投審議委員會) turned down proposed referendums on the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) with China three times, despite (or perhaps because of) the fact that it had more than enough signatures and support in polls!

* In mid-2009, the Ma government reverted the Taiwan Democracy Memorial Hall (臺灣民主紀念館) to its former name: the Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall (蔣中正紀念堂).

And I wouldn't be able to forget, no matter how hard I tried, that while Ma is in office as president of Taiwan, he primarily serves China. Here are some very recent examples:

* Ma wants people to stop calling China "China" and to call it "the mainland" or "the other side."

* A short time later, Beijing "praises" Ma for this.

* The Philippine government deports 14 Taiwanese suspects to China, basing the decision on a "one China" policy, yet Ma places zero blame on China.

People of Taiwan, when are you going to stop this from ever happening again?

If you have additional relevant examples to include in the topics above, please submit them in the comments below this post on Taiwan Matters! (use the HTML above the comment submission box for links) or via e-mail.

Further reading:
* Names and faces of some of the victims of the 228 Massacre (Hanzi)

* Wednesday, February 28, 2007 on Taiwan Matters!: Remembering two 228 Incidents (written before someone pointed out the obvious: that it should be referred to as the "228 Massacre" instead)

* Monday, March 1, 2004 on It's Not Democracy, It's A Conspiracy!: Hand-in-hand for peace (about my participation in the "228 Hand-in-Hand Rally" at 2:28 PM on Saturday, February 28, 2004)

* Monday, February 21, 2011 on Strait Talk: It's Taiwan, not China... Tales from Formosa, The Beautiful Island: "Formosa Displayed, Formosa Betrayed: Taiwan's 228 Museum Rewriting History?"

Dates with disaster: Taiwan, 台灣, 228 Massacre, 二二八大屠殺, 228 Incident, 二二八事件, Ma Ying-jeou, 馬英九, Chinese Nationalist Party, 中國國民黨, Kuomintang, KMT, 國民黨

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!

Lunar New Year in Taiwan: 2011

2011-02-02T22:07:00.002+08:00

In Taiwan, you can even call it "Taiwanese New Year"!
I'm back from a long break in blogging with a slight variation of the "traditional" New Year post. To kick things off this time around, here's a musical video wishing you a Happy Taiwanese New Year (brought to my attention on Twitter by cyrixhero):

3:58 YouTube video: "快樂台灣年 Happy Taiwanese new year "
Thursday, February 3, 2011 (That's tomorrow!) is New Year's Day as celebrated by the citizens of several Asian countries as well as by many other people around the world. Too many English-speaking people use the term "Chinese New Year" to describe the holiday, despite the fact that the direct back-translation "中國新年" is rarely used by Mandarin speakers. Chinese people usually call the holiday "Lunar New Year" (農曆新年) or "Spring Festival" (春節).

Furthermore, the holiday doesn't belong solely to the Chinese.

Start with the person in the mirror
Why should you change the way you speak? Here's an example for your consideration.

Have you ever heard of the 228 Massacre? Like many others, I used to refer to it as the "228 Incident," but when someone reminded me about how that diminishes the fact that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) killed countless Taiwanese in that "incident," I immediately made the change in my speech and writing. What I don't get is how some people who I am certain are pro-Taiwan somehow cling to the phrase "Chinese New Year."

Are you that kind of person? If so, I hope you can ask yourself why you do that and if you can change.

Simplicity
Here's a clear and simple list of reasons to help you decide to make that change:

1. Lunar New Year is not exclusively Chinese.

2. Even Chinese people call the holiday "Lunar New Year," so you won't be hurting the feelings of 1.3 billion Chinese by using that name.

3. Since you're reading this blog, there's a good chance that you are in Taiwan or that you are Taiwanese. (Maybe neither of those things applies to you -- you might just be interested in doing something to help Taiwan.)

4. Way too many people already do things which confuse others into believing that Taiwan's culture is a subset of China's.

5. You don't have to do things just because others do them or because they're habits.

Language is a virus (from outer space)
For some more background (you'll have to follow the links and do some more reading), here's a recap (with some spelling changes) of a couple of my earlier posts related to why many people prefer to call this holiday "Lunar New Year" (Taiwanese: Lông-li̍k sin-nî; Hanzi: 農曆新年; Hanyu pinyin: Nónglì xīnnián):

It doesn't just belong to the Chinese

Nor is it just "politically correct." Read about it in English and/or Chinese.

Happy Lunar New Year! 萬事如意! [bān-sū jû-ì! / wànshì rúyì!]

UPDATE:
Being in a bit of a rush to begin my vacation, I missed these links (all are presented in both English and Mandarin):* How the people of Vietnam celebrate Lunar New Year* How the people of South Korea celebrate Lunar New Year* How the people of Singapore celebrate Lunar New Year* How the people of Malaysia celebrate Lunar New Year

And here's an update on the Taiwanese Romanization which I derived by using a dictionary on the web site of Taiwan's Ministry of Education (MOE):

Lông-li̍k sin-nî khuài-lo̍k! (農曆新年快樂！) Bān-sū jû-ì! (萬事如意！)

If you're Taiwanese, stop inadvertently diluting your own culture. Remember (Ē -kì-tit/Ōe-kì-tit [要記得]): Every time you say "Lunar New Year," you're saying "No!" to those who want to promote China while diminishing Taiwan.

Related reading:
* Check out the Twitter search results for "Lunar New Year." I'm seeing Tweets there by people from Indonesia, Vietnam, South Korea, Singapore, Malaysia, Taiwan, and other countries around the globe!

* See what Taiwan's Government Information Office (GIO) says about Lunar New Year.

Distinguishables: Taiwan, 台灣, China, 中國, Lunar New Year, 農曆新年

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!

Taiwanderful's Best Taiwan Blog Awards 2010

2010-12-04T23:30:00.007+08:00

Another "election," but without the noise trucks

It's time for the third annual Best Taiwan Blog Awards, put on by David and Fili of Taiwanderful. One of the purposes of these awards is "community building and linking" among Taiwan bloggers.

Click the image above to go to the page where you can directly vote for Taiwan Matters!
where it's all Taiwan politics 24/7/365.
Once there, click the plus (+) sign to vote.
拜託！拜託！
You can vote for your favorite Taiwan blogs (Anyone can vote for as many blogs as they'd like -- no registration required!) by clicking the plus sign (+) below the number in the box just below the name of any blogs you like. Follow the link at the beginning of this paragraph to see a list of Taiwan blogs, background info, and links.

Follow this link for more info about the awards. Get to know more Taiwan blogs, and let's all help each other show Taiwan's unique aspects to each other and to the rest of the world!

Badges: Taiwan, 台灣

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!

Taiwan's 2010 municipal election results

2010-11-28T21:20:00.002+08:00

TVBS vs. reality (again)

Another election in Taiwan appears to have left the country with the same old political landscape. The winners were:

Taipei City (台北市): Hau Lung-bin (郝龍斌, Chinese KMT, incumbent)
New Taipei (新北市): Eric Chu (朱立倫, Chinese KMT, same party as incumbent)
Taichung (大台中): Jason Hu (胡志強, Chinese KMT, incumbent)
Tainan (大台南): William Lai (賴清德, DPP, same party as incumbent)
Kaohsiung (大高雄): Chen Chu (陳菊, DPP, incumbent)

But it's not exactly the "status quo" which even the Taipei Times calls it in a headline on news of the election results.

While the number of DPP vs. Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) mayors remains the same (2:3) as it was before yesterday's election, the vote totals tell a different story.

Who got the most votes?
Adding the ballots for all five municipalities, the DPP got a total of 3,772,373 votes (49.87% -- very nearly an absolute majority) compared to the Chinese KMT's 3,369,052 (44.54%). The combined total of all other candidates' votes was a mere 422,692 (5.59%). While this analysis doesn't change the outcome of the election one bit, it does indicate that the DPP have "gained more than 340,000 votes in the five municipalities" (compared with votes for their candidate in the 2008 presidential election). At the other end of the political spectrum, the Chinese KMT -- in contrast with what the international media wants you to believe -- is failing in policy, governance, and strategy, and has lost more than a million votes in these municipalities.

But what I really want to focus on in this post is certain pre-election surveys and how they are regularly wrong.

Oops! They did it again!
Let's compare the pro-blue (pro-unification/pro-China/pro-Chinese KMT) TVBS' final pre-election surveys for all five electoral areas with the actual results of these elections. If most of their surveys were at least close to the margin of error, they might be trustworthy. But they are not.

In particular, I want to focus on the survey numbers for DPP candidates compared to the actual results.

Municipality/ candidate	*TVBS* survey results	Actual election results
Kaohsiung Chen Chu (陳菊)	41%	52.8% (+11.8%)
Tainan William Lai (賴清德)	47%	60.41% (+13.41%)
Taichung Su Jia-chyuan (蘇嘉全)	43%	48.88% (+5.88%)
New Taipei Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文)	49%	47.39% (-1.61%)
Taipei City Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌)	39%	43.81% (+4.81%)

Only one out of the five surveys above was within its margin of error (3.1 percentage points). And you know something? One out of five equals two out of ten, and two out of ten is good enough for TVBS host Lee Tao (李濤).

Could such inaccuracy be on purpose -- done to fill certain voters with hope, others with despair?

Further reading:
* English version of the Central Election Commission web site

* Hanzi version of the Central Election Commission web site

* Although they only hold a majority of city council seats in Tainan, the DPP made some gains at that level, too: "2010 ELECTIONS: KMT, DPP each claim 130 city councilor seats"

* The China Post says that "Pollsters wrong-footed by unexpected shooting."

* Singapore's Straits Times paints the election results as a sunny day for the Chinese KMT.

* The New York Times fluffs the Chinese KMT by saying that the elections "reaffirm[ed] national support for a party that has made improved relations with the Chinese mainland the center of its political agenda."

* BBC absurdly says that the Chinese KMT were "boosted in mayor elections" and that "Correspondents say the results are seen as an endorsement of the KMT's push for warmer relations with China." Could those "correspondents" be anyone like Cindy Sui and her husband Ralph Jennings?

Victims of the outcome: Taiwan, 台灣, 2010 municipal elections, 五都選舉, TVBS, BS-TV, Lee Tao, 李濤

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!

Freedom of speech in Taiwan being oppressed again

2010-11-04T02:21:00.002+08:00

Chinese KMT gov't to the people: "It's our party, and you'd better not mock it!"

The latest example of Ma Ying-jeou's (馬英九) Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government infringing on free speech (see earlier examples at the bottom of this post) involves a video parodying a campaign ad by incumbent Taichung mayor Jason Hu (胡志強). After mocking a candidate from the ruling party, the creator of the video -- Kuso Cat (AKA 廖小貓) -- was threatened with a lawsuit by Mayor Hu and is being watched by all sorts of government eyes, and the media has been reporting it incessantly as a top story.

Here's the kuso version of the video:

4:00 YouTube video: "台中胡錢豹九週年慶_唬屎狗_廖小貓出品"
Translation: "Taichung Hu Qian-bao's [a play on the name of the 金錢豹 nightclub] 9th Anniversary - Hǔ Shǐ Gǒu [Bluff Shit Dog] - by Kuso Cat"
I don't completely agree with the Taipei Times' characterization that the video "portrayed the young women as working as hostesses at a nightclub in Taichung." An important bit of context that's missing from the related coverage is this this October 29, 2010 news story about police alerting the girls at a Taichung night club of an impending raid. The video of the girls sneaking around fits perfectly. In both the original video and the parody, Jason Hu calls these girls "Everybody's girls!" Although the vehicle for the parody is the video and the girls seen within, its real target is the public figure they're promoting: Jason Hu.

David Reid has a detailed intro to this incident and several related links in a blog post titled "KUSO and freedom of speech in Taiwan."

The sort of attention the government is giving this video (despite prosecutors' denial that there will be an indictment, the kinds of threats implied in the Ministry of Education's letter asking National Taiwan University to "carefully monitor" the political discussions on PTT's "Gossiping" forum) provides yet another example of how things that are critical of Chinese KMT politicians draw swift attention from the law while attacks against politicians from the pro-Taiwan/pro-democracy DPP are ignored. Because Taiwan suffered for decades under the Chinese KMT's martial law and White Terror (which ended not so long ago), and since so many setbacks to Taiwan's democracy have occurred so rapidly since Ma's inauguration in May 2008, it's easy to get the impression that we're very quickly returning to that kind of rule.

Questions to counter the media memes
* Who "portrayed the young women as working as hostesses at a nightclub in Taichung" first? Or should I say Hu "portrayed the young women as working as hostesses at a nightclub in Taichung" first?! (Hu: "Everybody's girls!")

* How could these girls -- who claim to have made this video just "with friends" -- get the chance to sit down with Mayor Hu and record him saying the things he says while their video camera is rolling?

* When businesses like the Golden Jaguar (金錢豹) are still flourishing -- despite promises by Hu that he would clean Taichung up -- doesn't this kind of parody practically write itself?

* Isn't the period of time just before an election the most likely time someone would mock a campaign ad? What kind of person would think there's anything at all "unusual" about the timing of the kuso video's appearance?

* On November 27, 2010, who will the citizens of Taichung elect to be their mayor for the next four years?

Remain alert!

Compare this!
Here's the source video for comparison. Note the multiple double entendres in the original title, including the play on Hu's Mandarin name:

3:14 YouTube video: "Hu's Girl MV-胡志強招募青年志工 "
Translation: "Jason Hu recruits young volunteers"
David Reid's post (linked above) also contains a video of Taiwanese bloggers in support of Kuso Cat.

A small sample of related incidents:
* December 9, 2008: The Chinese KMT "blatantly launched a drive to control the news reporting and programming of Taiwan's Public Television Service Foundation (PTSF), which manages the Taiwan Public Television Service (TPS) on behalf of our nation's citizens." TPS includes Taiwan Public Television, Hakka Television and Indigenous Television, and the China Television Service.

* December 10, 2008: Chinese KMT legislator John Chiang (蔣孝嚴) -- bastard son of Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) -- speaks at Tainan's Chengkung University (成功大學), ROC flags are removed because Chinese students are present, a Taiwanese student protests, Chiang tells the student to "be open-minded" and LIES, saying that there wasn't a flag to begin with. But the removal of at least one flag was already captured on video. A woman on the stage asks the student to "be respectful" -- but what happened to respecting the students of the university who are citizens of Taiwan?

* December 11, 2008: Just four hours after Human Rights Day has ended, 200 or so police round up the Tibetans sitting in Liberty Square (自由廣場) and take them -- some who can't speak Mandarin -- off to the hills of Neihu and Guandu. The police also evict the students from the Wild StrawBerries movement (a group of students protesting the outdated Assembly and Parade Act [集會遊行法]) from the square. Check out some of the police violence that was caught on camera.

* December 17, 2008: The home of Chen Tsung-yi (陳宗逸) -- manager of the recently-demised New Taiwan Weekly (新台灣週刊) -- is searched by agents from the Taipei City branch of the Criminal Investigation Bureau. Chen claims that the agents attempted to intimidate him, and were deceptive about what they were looking for.

* December 19, 2008: The Wild StrawBerries' live broadcast disappears from the Justin.tv web site. A notice says that it was "for violating the Terms of Service." An inquiry I sent to Justin.tv gets me only a form letter reply.

* January 16, 2009: The large teapot-shaped object in Taipei which just over a year ago was renamed the "National Taiwan Democracy Memorial Hall" (國立台灣民主紀念堂) is retrogressing to its original name of "Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall" (蔣介石紀念堂) to honor the late dictator and mass murderer that the Chinese KMT still worships. Here's a related editorial cartoon ("Out with the new, in with the old. More authoritarianism, less democracy.").

* March 6, 2009: An 18-year-old senior high school student in Chiayi shouts at President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), telling him to "step down" (下台). He is taken in and fingerprinted by police. Taiwan Echo has another post on the subject.

* March 29, 2009: Police with video cameras intrude upon a private meeting of bloggers demanding personal information from attendees. The police were unable to explain their presence, and superiors denied having ordered the intrusion. Despite police "apologies" two days later, incidents which indicate a return to the days of White Terror continue to occur all-too-frequently.

And these were just a few examples I already had conveniently available…

The natural conclusion
Unless you pay close attention to these kinds of incidents, they will continue to happen, and your freedom of speech will continue to rapidly erode.

Pixel chillers: Taiwan, 台灣, Kuso Cat, 廖小貓, Jason Hu, 胡志強, Hu's Girl, 唬屎狗, White Terror, 白色恐怖, martial law, 戒嚴

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!

Formosa Betrayed, a powerful story

2010-08-08T23:20:00.002+08:00

This can't possibly be the same film Ian Bartholemew reviewed Friday

The film Formosa Betrayed, whose screenplay amalgamates the tales of the 1980s murders of Carnegie Mellon University professor Chen Wen-chen (陳文成) and writer Henry Liu (劉宜良, AKA Chiang Nan [江南]), has been discussed publicly for almost four years, and it finally made it to general release at cinemas in Taiwan on Friday, August 6, 2010.

Yet Taipei Times movie critic Ian Bartholemew seems to think it was based upon the George Kerr book of the same name (it was not), that it was about the events surrounding the 228 Massacre (二二八大屠殺) of 1947 (even though that event -- which happened 36 years prior to our story -- is mentioned within, it's not part of the plot of this movie), and that "Retrocession" [sic] is the proper term for the occupation of Taiwan by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) (it is not).

Formosa Betrayed movie poster
outside of Taichung's Tiger City
Photo by Tim Maddog
(Click to enlarge)
I had awaited this film's arrival in Taiwan for such a long time, and having seen so many previews, reviews, and interviews, I was a little bit worried that there wouldn't be very much left for me to experience anew when I saw it in a movie theater. Fortunately, I was wrong.

Before I get to anything involving spoilers, let me tell you a few things about the movie in general.

It is what it is
So, what is Formosa Betrayed? The story centers around FBI Agent Jake Kelly (played by James van der Beek) and his search for the two gangsters who murder Taiwanese-American professor Henry Wen. The evidence brings Jake to Taiwan, where he meets waiter/independence activist Ming (明, played by Will Tiao [刁毓能], who also co-wrote and produced the movie) and uncovers more truth than his superiors ever wanted him to. The events take place in 1983, during the White Terror period and four years before the lifting of the Chinese KMT's 38-year-long imposition of martial law on Taiwan.

This is thriller
Beyond the film's historical implications (being the first American film to deal with Taiwan-US relations"), we are propelled through the story by our concern for the protagonists, Jake and Ming, by their struggles against bureaucracies, gangsters, police agencies, and even military officials, and by the hope that they will succeed and survive. It shouldn't matter if you are American, Taiwanese, or neither -- unless you hate one or both of those countries, you'll probably care for both characters, and you will feel their pain as you watch horrific events unfold.

The antagonists are everywhere. Watch the movie and see how almost every time Jake tries to do the right thing, someone delays him, finds his "target" before he does, or tries to bring him great harm. You might not even realize whether some characters are the good guys or the bad guys until near the end of the flick.

Production values
The film -- directed by Adam Kane (Heroes) and photographed by Irek Hartowicz -- has a gritty, desaturated look throughout much of it, creating an atmosphere appropriate to both the period and the content. The first image we see -- Jake's blood-splattered face in very shallow depth of field -- sets the tone for what's to follow.

The score didn't draw much attention to itself, remaining mostly way in the background except in some especially tense scenes. Two or three times during the film, I got quite a jolt from the audio-visual-story combo -- an excellent reason to see the film in a theater.

Other reviewers' complaints about the film being shot in Thailand instead of Taiwan drive me nuts. The reasons for it happening have been explained again and again, and even more detail has come out quite recently about the Chinese KMT's involvement. My wife -- Have I mentioned that she's Taiwanese? -- didn't have any complaints about the locations not looking enough like Taiwan in the eighties, so I have a hard time accepting that particular gripe.

Some of these complainers may merely wish to discredit Formosa Betrayed. Others may have unthinkingly been influenced by such thoughts and are repeating them. Whatever their reasons, it's as if everyone suddenly forgot how to suspend their disbelief for this particular motion picture. (Pssssst! You're actually sitting in a chair in an air-conditioned theater in the year 2010 in a city which may or may not be Taipei!) With the budget limitations, I would guess that telling the story took priority over adding a CGI recreation of Taipei.

So, while it may not be a state-of-the-art spectacle, it does a great job of doing what people go to the movies for: it tells a powerful story.

It ain't what it's not
Formosa Betrayed is not an allegory. It's basically a straight-up dramatization of events related to Taiwan's history -- a story which has needed to be told for a very long time. And Will Tiao, Adam Kane, and the rest of the cast and crew have done a formidable job of it.

What will I learn?
* The Chinese KMT is not protecting Taiwan from Commie bandits, and they never have.
* The United States' cooperation with the Chinese KMT ignores/involves lots and lots of evil.
* Good people standing up for basic human rights get called "gangsters" and "terrorists" by those responsible for mass murder of innocent civilians.
* Taiwan is not China, and despite frequent claims about the matter, Taiwanese are not treated like "brothers" by the Chinese.
* Others' admonitions which are supposedly "for your own good" are often ways for them to hold onto power while keeping you down.

Who should see this film?
Every single Taiwanese should see this film, whether they already know about this history or not. Anyone who has ever supported the Chinese KMT should see this film and open their eyes widely. Americans should see this film to understand what their government has done (and continues to do) to Taiwan.

If you enjoy thrillers, you should see Formosa Betrayed because it's an exciting story which, as Roger Ebert says, is "actually about something."

If you don't like mainstream Hollywood flicks, see it for its independent style.

If you don't fall into any of those categories, make like a Nike ad, and just see it!

Where to see it
I saw it at Tiger City in Taichung. Here's the page where you can find showtimes for all Vieshow Cinemas (威秀影城) in Taiwan. See it soon, as it probably won't be here for long.

Fiction vs. reality (SPOILERS)
Some people have said that the people and events portrayed in Formosa Betrayed are entirely imaginary. Those people are either lying or they're ignorant -- perhaps both. Here is a short list of some people/things in the film and the people/things they correspond to (or not) in real life:

* Wen Ming-hua (溫明華, AKA Henry Wen, the murder victim) = Chen Wen-chen + Henry Liu.
* Guy with camera at student protest = Student spies funded by the Chinese KMT.
* David Wu Da-wei + James Lee Shin-shen (the killers) = Chen Chi-li (陳啟禮) and others.
* Ming's sister, Maysing (美星): "Don't use your phone. They're listening." = Government phone tapping of political opponents/dissidents/competitors -- something which still happens quite frequently.
* The protest in Kaohsiung = The Kaohsiung Incident of 1979. (Note: Just a few months after Formosa Betrayed had completed filming, similar things happened during the protests against visiting Chinese envoy, Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait Chairman Chen Yunlin [陳雲林]. including the brutal beating of an FTV [民視] reporter. Also watch Red Caution to see what happened to Taiwan in the first few months Ma Ying-jeou [馬英九] was in office as president.)
* The murder of Ming's wife and daughter in their home = The murder of Lin I-hsiung's (Lîm Gī-hiông, 林義雄) family while their home was under 24-hour police surveillance.
* The way Ming's father was killed = The way many people were killed in the 228 Massacre: shot in the head and/or dumped in a river. (Others were buried alive.)
* Professor Wen and Ming being called "gangsters" and "terrorists" = A common tactic used by the gangster-affiliated Chinese KMT.
* 健康 (Health[y] brand cigarettes = The ironically-named Long Life (長壽) brand of cigarettes.
* The movie ≠ The book by George Kerr. Although it's got the same title, and it's about the same country and the same party-state, it's a different story.

Other interesting tidbits (minor SPOILERS)
* Jake is assigned Room 228 (a reference to the 228 Massacre of 1947) in his Taipei hotel.
* When Jake is at the airport leaving Taiwan, a voice is heard on the airport intercom announcing in English "China Airline[s] flight 1947 from Taipei to New York is now boarding…"

Just one thing…
As Michael Turton pointed out previously, that onscreen title at the end… it's wrong, and it should be fixed because it undermines the message the rest of the film tries so hard to get across. It says [highlight mine]:

Currently there are 23 countries that recognize Taiwan as an independent nation.

The United States is not one of them.

The problem is that the countries which have official relations with "Taiwan" recognize Taiwan as the "Republic of China" and its associated claim to represent -- y'know -- China. Because of the "one-China" policies of both the PRC and the ROC, not a single one of those countries recognize Taiwan's independence the way they should -- and that right there is the problem!

A whole spectrum of other reviews
* David Reid's review: "Formosa Betrayed: a quest for truth and justice."
* Jerome F. Keaton's review: "The Film 'Formosa Betrayed' Though Different from 'Cape No. 7' is Important for Taiwan Youth."
* Michael Turton's review: "The Gospel According to Will: Formosa Betrayed."
* Sheri Linden wrote a fair-even-if-not-entirely-postive review in The Hollywood Reporter.
* Despite the number of stars he gave it, Roger Ebert seems to have liked it.
* Ian Bartholemew wrote what could be the most uninformed movie review I've ever read.
* Does Vancouver's Katherine Monk think that watching Formosa Betrayed is as bad as being colonized and placed under nearly four decades of martial law? Her excessively negative review is titled: "Viewers are ones who are betrayed."

MacGuffins: Taiwan, 台灣, Formosa Betrayed, 被出賣的台灣, movie, 電影, Will Tiao, 刁毓能, White Terror, 白色恐怖, martial law, 戒嚴

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!

Taiwan round-up, July 2010; plus Ma Ying-jeou's nonsense

2010-07-31T23:51:00.007+08:00

First, a bit of catching up is necessary

A lot has been going on in July -- and I'm not just talking about the extra work that I get during this time of the year. Here are just a few of the more prominent news items I should have been writing about in more detail over the past month:

* Despite not being in possession of the land titles, the Chinese Nationalist Party-led (KMT) Miaoli County government destroyed the rice paddies of several farmers in the Jhunan Township (竹南) borough of Dapu (大埔) and carted off the rich soil, replacing it with junk-filled dirt. Despite knowing that the current Land Expropriation Act (土地徵收條例) is unfair, the Ministry of the Interior vowed to continue destroying these farmers' lives and property with their right hand until their left hand is good and ready to change the law. As I've said many times, the Chinese KMT doesn't follow the law -- the law follows the Chinese KMT.

* Michael Turton blogged on the protests in Taipei on July 17, 2010 which were related to the above land grabs: "Miaoli County Land Seizure Sparks Farmer Protests"

* In Yunlin County, a fire (explosion?) on July 25, 2010 at Formosa Petrochemical Group's (FPG, 台塑石化) naphtha cracker No. 6 is followed by the appearance of dead ducks, fish, and clams in the vicinity. (Yo, EPA! Is there an alternate explanation for what could have killed all these animals at this particular time?! If so, we'd all like to hear it!) An earlier blaze had occurred at FPG's naphtha cracker No. 1 on July 7, 2010. It took six days after the second conflagration within a month -- plus large protests by Mailiao residents -- before Premier Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) paid a visit to the site and said they would temporarily suspend operations at the plant. (How long do you think it'll be before that promise gets broken?) Oh, and there's the horrific tale of a dead runaway foreign laborer (who had been poisoned by unsafe working conditions) whose body was left outside the plant's perimeter after a much earlier incident in an apparent attempt to… make the original situation even worse? (See this last item discussed on the July 30, 2010 edition of Talking Show [大話新聞].)

* Premier Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) tries to do his own verbal "detour" after saying that already-endangered Taiwanese pink dolphins would "make a detour" (轉彎) to avoid the planned Kuokuang Petrochemical plant scheduled to be built on coastal wetlands near the mouth of the Jhuoshuei River (濁水溪) in Dacheng Township (大城), Changhua County.

* Remember that the most important thing about the following story has to do with the people making the accusation: Chen Chih-chung (陳致中), the son of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) who is currently running for a city council seat in Kaohsiung, is accused by Next Weekly (壹週刊) of soliciting a prostitute, despite the lack of any hard evidence. While his car was photographed at the scene of the alleged crime, Chen Chih-chung himself was not. Politically motivated, y'think?

* Taichung Mayor Jason Hu (胡志強) was placed among "the world's top [10] urban leaders" by Monocle Magazine. Although some people say the title of the piece makes the "honor" facetious, the content -- which appears 100% serious as well as positive -- tells me otherwise.

* You may notice that the four links at the top of the blogroll in the Taiwan Matters sidebar -- the links to Talking Show (大話新聞) videos -- have been crossed out. That's because YouTube suspended all four of those accounts. Fortunately, someone new has dutifully taken over uploading the shows. Take a look at the uploads on user 555victory555's channel.

* After all that stuff ~~President~~ ~~Regional Administrator~~ (cough, cough) Mr. Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) told us about the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) signed with China being purely economic and having nothing to do with unification, the legislature's Organic Laws and Statutes Bureau tells us -- in a report whose release people had complained since at least June 23, 2010 (nearly a week before the ECFA was signed) was being delayed (for over a month now) because it might give a negative impression of the ECFA -- that what Ma said was, uh, not true.

* On July 24, 2010, the U.S. Navy posted a photo taken during Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) 2010 captioned [highlight mine]: "The Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS Ronald Reagan leads a formation of ships from Korea, Taiwan, Japan, Singapore, France, Canada, Australia and the U.S." A week later, that photo isn't showing up, but another photo with the same caption can still be viewed.

* Formosa Betrayed (the movie) will be showing in Taiwan in less than one week. With the domestic premier taking place Friday, August 6, 2010, producer/actor Will Tiao (刁毓能) is in town, and he reveals in an interview with the Taipei Times how the Chinese KMT interfered with the filming process. Jerome F. Keating, PhD also has a piece about the film: "Still Not Free of KMT Bias, Taiwan Prepares for the Film, 'Formosa Betrayed.'" In that post, he also links to an image of the famous comic strip by Bo Yang (柏楊) which got the artist nine years in prison.

* … and like I said, much more than I've been able to keep up with in great detail. I've probably missed a few important ones, but those are pretty much off the top of my head. Follow me on Twitter to see what I'm writing about in real time.

No-brainer
Since Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) so frequently spouts nonsense which should get him laughed off the world's stage, I made a little video showing how audiences should react to such things:

2:05 Xtranormal video: "The audience sees through Ma Ying-jeou's nonsense"

Here's the text spoken by Superzero Ma in the video:

Hi, I'm Ma Ying-jeou, president of the Republic of China, here in Taiwan Province. As you can see, no one is pulling my strings. That's because Foxconn made a special long distance remote control for Hu Jintao to use on me! But since I am the president of the Republic of China, I am actually Hu Jintao's leader. And as president of the ROC, I am, therefore, also the president of Mongolia! Let me explain. Back in March 2008, after I made a campaign promise to the people of Taiwan saying "no unification," 7.6 million people there voted for me, making me the democratically-elected leader of the "unified" Republic of China's 1.3 billion people, right? Does that not make perfect sense to you? Okay, how about this? Without using your brain too much, see if you can repeat after me: "We are all part of the non-barbarian Zhonghua minzu family, blah blah blah." "The other side of the Taiwan Strait is our mainland region, blah blah blah." Or how about this? "I love Taiwan!" That one works best in the months before important elections. Do you have a question? I'm sorry. I can't hear you. Thank you for your comment. I must be going.

Precipitates: Taiwan, 台灣, Dapu, 大埔, Formosa Petrochemical Co., 台塑石化, Wu Den-yih, 吳敦義, Chen Chih-chung, 陳致中, Jason Hu, 胡志強

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!

6/26 protest to demand referendum on ECFA

2010-06-25T03:53:00.001+08:00

Be there if you can!

The Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) government is planning to sign an Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA, 經濟合作架構協議) with Taiwan's untrustworthy authoritarian neighbor China on June 29. That's next Tuesday, despite the fact that even polls by media which favors Ma and his party show that a majority of Taiwanese oppose the agreement and that people of all political stripes support holding a referendum on the issue.

Ten or twenty years from now, when you reflect back on tomorrow's rally to show the Ma government -- and especially the rest of the world -- what the people of Taiwan really think of this deal, will you be able to say "I was there!" or will you say "I was too busy/tired/apathetic, so I didn't go"? Think hard before you choose the latter.

Citizens demand a referendum [on ECFA] and oppose the "one-China" market
June 26 [2010], gather at 3 PM @ Wanhua Station and Dinghao Plaza
(Click to slightly enlarge)
Wednesday's Taipei Times has the important details about the 626 protest in English:

The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) said yesterday that 100,000 people are expected to take to the streets of Taipei on Saturday to demand that the government put its proposed plan to sign an economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) with China to a referendum.

[...]

The party said demonstrators would be split into two groups — an "anti-'one China' market" group and a "referendum on an ECFA" group.

The "anti-'one China' market" route will start at Dinghao Plaza and travel along Zhongxiao E Road, Linsen S Road and Renai Road Sec 1.

The "referendum on an ECFA" march, meanwhile, will begin at Wanhua Station and proceed along Monga Boulevard, Heping W Road Sec 2, Fuzhou Street, Roosevelt Road Sec 1 and Zhongshan S Road.

Both marches will start at 4pm and converge on Ketagalan Boulevard in front of the Presidential Office at 5pm, where a number of DPP officials are expected to make speeches.

The protest is scheduled to finish at 7pm, the party said.

How 'bout we make it 200,000?

Remember to take pictures, record videos, and post them online so that when the media underreports the numbers or claims that the crowds were violent, people will be able to find out for themselves what really happened.

Lest ye forget!
And I want to remind readers once again what Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao (溫家寶) said about ECFA being one step toward "complete unification of the motherland [sic]":

0:35 YouTube video: "DPP ECFA referendum ad - with English titles"

Posters: Taiwan, 台灣, protest, 抗議, ECFA, 經濟合作架構協議, referendum, 公投

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!

"Mainland"? Which "mainland"?

2010-06-20T22:37:00.004+08:00

An obvious symptom of brainwashing in Taiwan (and elsewhere)

Because of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), for most of the past six decades, Taiwan's educational system has indoctrinated students with the concept that "my country" (我國/本國) includes Taiwan, the territory now controlled by the People's Republic of China (PRC), and Mongolia. As a result, certain words used by Taiwanese reveal how deeply this indoctrination has penetrated.

An old Geography textbook used in Taiwan
Tim Maddog photo
(Click to enlarge)
While most elementary school students these days will state "Taiwan" (台灣) as the name of their country, and only an incredibly small minority will say they are from the "ROC" (中華民國), there's still a lot of deep-set confusion. As Professor Lee Hsiao-feng (李筱峰, AKA Jim Lee, of National Taipei University's Graduate School of Taiwanese Culture) explains in the piece I will translate below, the words we are exposed to on a daily basis affect our ability to see clearly and even to clearly form our own identity.

Here it is, 「大陸」「大陸」，哪個大陸？ ("'Mainland,' 'mainland,' which mainland?") [translations, text coloration mine]:

俗話說「什麼人玩什麼鳥」，同樣的，「什麼人說什麼話」。在當前國家認同錯雜混亂的台灣，從每個人使用的不同用詞，就可以判斷他的國家認同和政治立場的差異。

People say, "This kind of person plays with this kind of bird" and "This kind of person uses these kinds of words" [both meaning: "A person is defined by the words they use"]. In the past, Taiwan's national identity has been a jumbled mess. From the different words that people use, you can spot the differences in people's sense of national identity and political affiliation.

記得蔡英文與馬英九進行電視辯論的時候，凡是對「中華人民共和國」的稱呼，馬英九一律把它改稱「大陸」，但是蔡英文則清清楚楚叫它為「中國」。全世界都知道，「中國」指的就是那個全名叫做「中華人民共和國」的國家。但是「大陸」呢？全世界沒有一個國家叫做「大陸」，倒是在地理上，有歐亞大陸、非洲大陸、美洲大陸。「大陸」，指的是哪一個大陸？馬英九不稱中國為「中國」，而稱「大陸」，為什麼？因為他所認同的國家就是中國，而且台灣是中國的一部分，如果他將對岸稱為「中國」，等於是將台灣置於中國之外，這是他無法容忍的。稱中國為「大陸」，表示兩邊都屬中國，而有「大陸地區」和「台灣地區」之分。所以將中國稱為「大陸」，其實是對台灣的矮化，是對台灣的貶損！

Think back to the televised debate between Tsai Ing-wen and Ma Ying-jeou. Each time the PRC came up, Ma consistently referred to it as the "mainland" while Tsai referred to it more clearly as "China." The whole world knows that "China" refers to the country whose full name is the "People's Republic of China." But what about "mainland"? There is no country on Earth called "Mainland" [Maddog note: Though I've capitalized it here (as if it were the name of a country), it shouldn't actually be capitalized unless it's the first word in a sentence.] -- it's merely a geographic term which could variously refer to the Eurasian continent, the African continent, or the North and South American continents. So why say "mainland"? Because Ma identifies with China and considers Taiwan to be part of China. If he were to call the other side "China," it would mean that Taiwan is something separate -- something Ma could never admit. By calling China the "mainland," he means that the two sides belong to China and that the "mainland area" and "Taiwan area" are both part of that China. This actually belittles and disparages Taiwan.

中國人馬英九稱中國為「大陸」，一點都不奇怪。奇怪的是，竟然也有自以為是獨派的人士，也習而不察，跟著人家把中國稱為「大陸」，這就自我矛盾了。

For Ma-the-Chinese to call China the "mainland" isn't strange at all. What is strange is when supporters of Taiwan's independence use the word out of sheer habit, following others' use of "mainland" when they mean "China" -- this is a contradiction of their own principles.

最近台灣出現了一個名詞叫做「陸生」，其實也有一樣的意涵。所謂「陸生」，就是「大陸學生」的簡稱。把中國來台的留學生稱為「陸生」，和稱中國為「大陸」一樣是對台灣的矮化。中國來的留學生，當然簡稱「中生」，怎麼變成「陸生」？

The word "lùshēng" has recently entered Taiwan's vocabulary. This contains a similar meaning. "Lùshēng" is merely a short form of ""dàlùxuéshēng" ("mainland students"). To call Chinese students "lùshēng" is just as belittling and disparaging of Taiwan as using the word "mainland" instead of "China." A more natural short form would be "Zhōngshēng." How did that become "lùshēng"?

再者，近年來出現了一個不三不四的名詞叫做「阿六仔」。許多人把中國人稱為「阿六仔」，所謂「六」，當然是大「陸」的轉音。「阿六仔」這個名詞，本身帶有輕蔑的語氣，殊不知用這種輕蔑的名詞形容對方，其實是矮化了台灣，貶損了自己而不自知。

Another strange word which has appeared in recent years is "a-la̍k-á" [Maddog note: The pronunciation of that term is invariably Taiwanese, not Mandarin]. Many people call Chinese (people) "a-la̍k-á" with the middle word "la̍k" ["six"] having the same pronunciation in Taiwanese as the "lù" in "dàlù." "A-la̍k-á" itself bears a pejorative tone, but actually one may not realize that using this kind of tone to describe others can also belittle Taiwan, disparage the user, and show self-unawareness.

這種矮化台灣、貶低台灣的用詞還有很多，例如，將孫文（孫逸仙）先生稱為「國父」就是。所謂「國父」是哪一「國」的「國父」？當然是指「中華民國」的國父。不要說連孫文本人都不知道他被國民黨稱為中華民國「國父」，孫文如果知道台灣人竟然也稱他為「國父」，一定詫異萬分。因為孫文在過世前一年曾經呼籲日本應該讓「朝鮮和台灣兩民族」獨立自治，而台灣人竟然還在叫他「國父」，真是蠢蛋！

There are many more words used to belittle and disparage Taiwan. For example, calling Sun Yat-sen the "nation's founding father." Which "nation" is he the "founding father" of? Of course that would be the "Republic of China [ROC]." Don't say that even Sun himself didn't know he was called "the nation's founding father" by the Chinese KMT, but if he could know that some Taiwanese still call him the "nation's founding father," he'd be completely amazed because a year before he died, Sun appealed to Japan to allow Korea and Taiwan to become independent. For Taiwanese to call him the "nation's founding father," they must really be morons!

至於那些遊走對岸淘金的藝人，也跟著中國人將中華人民共和國稱為「內地」，那就不只是「蠢蛋」兩字所能形容了！日本殖民統治時代，台灣人稱日本本土為「內地」，清帝國時代則稱中國本土為「內地」，現在台灣不屬中華人民共和國，卻也稱呼人家「內地」。台灣人，你要自我作踐到幾時？

As for entertainers who wander off to China in search of money and who refer to the PRC as the "heartland," not even the word "moron" can describe what they are! When Taiwan was a Japanese colony, Taiwanese referred to Japan as the "heartland." However, during the Qing Dynasty, [what we now call] China was the "heartland." Present-day Taiwan doesn't belong to the PRC, yet people still use the term "heartland." People of Taiwan: How long will you humiliate yourselves like this?

One "mainland" which Professor Lee left out was Australia's. People in Tasmania will refer to the non-Tasmanian part of Australia as the "mainland" while people in New Zealand never do so -- because it's a whole other country. It's a good example to use with people who don't seem to "get it."

Related:
* A guy I met later on Facebook called in to New Taiwan Go Go Go (新台灣加油) to complain about so-called pro-Taiwan TV stations using the word "mainland." I posted the video on YouTube:

1:23 YouTube video: "Mr. Chuang wants green media to stop saying "mainland""
* Hena (Taiwanese for erhu, 二胡) player Kenny Wen is one of those who sold his soul to Beijing and was "forced" to call China the "heartland" (內地):

9:00 YouTube video: "Kenny Wen Teaches: How to sell your soul to the demons in Beijing"
* A Taiwan Matters post with links to videos of the entire debate referred to in Lee's piece: "Ralph Jennings pushes anti-Taiwan, pro-Ma propaganda"

* If you need help with the videos linked in the post at the link above, the Taipei Times translated the entire debate between Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) and Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) into English:
- Part One: Ma, Tsai lock horns in ECFA debate
- Part Two: Tsai questions Ma on job losses from signing ECFA

Words which mean things: Taiwan, 台灣, propaganda, 宣傳, brainwashing, 洗腦, Lee Hsiao-feng, 李筱峰

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!

Ralph Jennings misreports on Taiwan again

2010-06-07T00:39:00.003+08:00

Completely unacceptable

On my Facebook wall, Alex Raymond alerted me to a Ralph Jennings piece from Saturday titled "Taiwanese show guarded acceptance of China pact."

Do Taiwanese "accept" this so-called Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) at all?

Take a look this particular paragraph of Jennings' article [emphasis mine]:

Political analysts said the size of the protest, a month after a sit-in in Taipei attracted only a few hundred, was an indication that Taiwan's public accepted the deal, wanted to know more details or believed the government was deaf to protests.

The first problem there is that Jennings quotes unnamed "political analysts." Would it make a difference if these "analysts" were close to President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and the party he chairs, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT)? Yes, it would. (See an earlier example of Jennings' use of similar tactics.)

The next problem is the simple lack of deductive logic. The first paragraph of the article claims that the size of Saturday's protest was "10,000" (and Jennings has greatly underestimated the number of attendees at previous protests by pro-Taiwan groups) and then tells readers of a sit-in that happened "a month" ago (which, in reality, was a 3-day protest which ended just 15 days ago) and which "attracted only a few hundred." Gee, according to my math, "10,000" is a much larger number, and 15 days is only half a month.

While it may be correct to say that Taiwanese "believed the government was deaf to protests," note how it's not the single possibility which was placed in the headline. Despite the addition of the word "guarded," the one which does appear there (and in the article minus the qualifier) is the one which is the easiest to disprove.

Just what do Taiwanese think about this ECFA?
Let's look at a poll from the pro-Chinese KMT TVBS which was released just this past Monday (May 31, 2010) [104 kb PDF file] for some indications [translations, emphasis mine]:

公投題目「是否同意政府與中國簽ECFA？」：同意42% v.s.不同意44%

Voting on a referendum which asks: "Should the government sign an ECFA with China?" 42% say "Yes" while 44% say "No."

[...] 15%未表示意見。

[...] 15% expressed no opinion.

[...]

辦 ECFA公投？民眾贊成的比例上升至55%，不贊成則下滑到 30%

Hold a referendum on ECFA? Public support increases to 55%, opposition slips to 30%

[...]

若辦公投，六成（59%）民眾說會去投票 [...]

If there is a referendum, 59% of the public says they will vote [...]

Bias!
I don't trust TVBS, but remember that if there's any bias in their poll, it will be in favor of those pushing this ECFA with China. So, I must wonder: Does Ralph Jennings hate Taiwan and the truth, or will he write just anything -- as long as he keeps getting paid to do so?

Don't just accept what you read, especially not when it's written by "pros" who repeatedly provide you with information that is as easily disputed as the stuff Jennings keeps shoveling.

Bonus
Check out how Reuters dissembles even more by using an image (with a caption that only appears as a pop-up) of cheering Taiwanese atop this version of the article.

Counterpoints: Taiwan, 台灣, ECFA, 經濟合作架構協議, Ralph Jennings, 唐甯思, media, 媒體

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!

Taiwan under Ma Ying-jeou is a mess

2010-06-05T23:32:00.003+08:00

Gangsters and police hand-in-hand -- and so much more!

Sun Moon Biotech -- the scene of the
May 28, 2010 shooting that took place
in broad daylight in Taichung City, Taiwan
in the presence of four police officers
Photo by Tim Maddog
(click to enlarge)

On Friday, May 28, 2010, the shooting murder of gang leader Weng Chi-nan (翁奇楠) which took place in broad daylight in the presence of (at least) four police officers in Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT)-led Taichung City pulled back the curtain on so much of what is wrong in Taiwan today.

The two senior officers on the scene were Taichung City Police Traffic Chief Lin Chi-you (林啟右) and Criminal Investigation Corps' Third Division head Lin Wen-wu (林文武). The two lower-ranking officers there were Shih Chang-hsing (石長興) and Sergeant Tai Chih-hung (戴志宏).

Surveillance video from the interior of the crime scene exists, but over a week later, not only has this video footage not been shown to the public to help identify and capture the shooter -- it is said to have already been partially erased. UPDATE: That page has ironically disappeared, but I fortunately saved an image of the web page. [/update]

Could somebody be hiding something, y'think? Can you say "accessories to the crime"?

Were the police officers there simply "drinking tea," as has been reported, were they "playing mahjong," or is such speculation just a distraction from what was really going on? So far, we can only rely on the testimony of seemingly untrustworthy sources. Right away all four officers on the scene claimed that they "didn't know" Wang.

But just days later, the story changes slightly. Also at the scene was retired officer Chen Wen-hsiung (陳文雄, the one you may have seen on TV yelling about people making "groundless accusations"), who now admits that he knew Wang, though he claims he "didn't know him well," and he says he invited the other four to the location. Tsk, tsk!

How long will it be before the story changes again?

Taichung Police Commissioner Hu Mu-yuan (胡木源) has already resigned as a result of this scandal. However, the re-election campaign of Taichung Mayor Jason Hu (胡志強) -- a Chinese KMT politician who has already held office since 2002 (thus having had plenty of time to do something about public order) -- is sure to suffer as a result of the constant attention being given to this matter.

Mayor Hu has repeatedly "declared war" on gangs, yet according to the National Police Agency (警政署), Taichung's crime rate has been the highest in the nation during the past six years.

This sure doesn't look anything like the "clean" Chinese KMT promised by Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) in his 2008 presidential election campaign.

The undemocratic Referendum ~~Review~~ Rejection Committee
In news about Taiwan's disappearing democracy, to no one's surprise, the Referendum Review Committee rejected the second proposal for a referendum on the current government's plan to sign an Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) with China. Even a poll by the deep-blue TVBS tells us that support for such a referendum increased from 48% to 55% [104 kb PDF file] since March 2009.

So why can't Taiwanese have a say in this matter? Referendum ~~Review~~ Rejection Committee chairman Chao Yung-mau (趙永茂) is claiming that "The TSU's proposal does not meet the qualification of 'approving a government policy' as stated in the Referendum Act."

This is just another of the Chinese KMT's word games which treat the Taiwanese as idiots.

The Ma government claims that the public supports ECFA, yet hundreds of thousands of signatures had been collected in support of this proposal. Could that number be the very reason the committee voted 12:4 to reject public opinion on something that could affect not only the economy but also Taiwan's sovereignty?

Radical (and mendacious) anti-Taiwan media
In a report on the latest rejected referendum, the frequently-mendacious news agency Agence France Presse (AFP) refers to the Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU) -- whose "spiritual leader" is former president (then-Chinese KMT) Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) -- as "a radical pro-independence party." More word games.

While I have previously complained about the TSU being infiltrated by Shih Ming-teh's (施明德) redshirts, there are only two groups which would consider the party itself to be "radical," and those groups would be the Chinese KMT and the CCP.

Why isn't anyone in the media referring to those two parties as "radical"?

China proves Ma to be a liar (How will he explain this away?)
After Ma's repeated claims that signing an ECFA with China would open the door for Taiwan to sign free trade agreements (FTAs) with other countries, Chinese officials are ironically the ones who have been more forthcoming:

On the China trade issue, Taiwan protested on Wednesday after a mainland foreign ministry spokesman said Beijing "resolutely opposed" official contact between its diplomatic allies and Taiwan.

Does it matter what Chinese officials say about this? Will that stop other countries from signing FTAs with Taiwan? Read what Franck Varga says about that below.

US Congress listens to Ma's critics, not to Ma
(and Ma listens to no one but China)
A recent report by Congressional Research Services (CRS) titled "Democratic Reforms in Taiwan" has expressed "concern" over "the prolonged detention of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) as a result of complaints by writers and scholars whose open letters (see link below) have been previously covered on this blog.

An article in the June 4, 2010 edition of the Taipei Times also has this to say about the report [highlights mine]:

"A number of professors, writers, activists and ex-officials primarily in the United States have signed open letters on what they called the 'erosion of justice' in Taiwan," the report says.

[...]

The US Congress has also helped, the report says, "by pressing the KMT [Chinese Nationalist Party] regime to end authoritarian abuses of power in favor of freedoms for all the people in Taiwan, including the majority Taiwanese."

The report says that a sustainable democracy helps Taiwan to guard against "undue" Chinese influence as cross-strait engagement has intensified under Ma.

Whenever people criticize things about the Ma government that anyone can see with their own eyes, the Ma government will have a response that treats you like you're imagining things (or perhaps that you're "not Chinese, so you couldn't possibly understand"), but their logic doesn't hold up to the facts. That doesn't seem to bother them in the least.

But remember this: When the Chinese KMT says "up," you should think "down" -- way down -- and check things out for yourself.

Related reading:
* David Reid of David on Formosa blogs: "Rejection of referendum is a denial of democratic rights"

* Ben Goren blogs on Letters from Taiwan: "Pants on Fire"

* Franck Varga blogs about gangsters, Chinese KMT hypocrisy, and more. As Franck points out, "They [the Ma government] want to let the Taiwanese believe that other countries will not be afraid of the Chinese reaction…"

* Michael Turton blogs on The View from Taiwan about Beijing slapping Ma in the face, noting Bonnie Glaser's Nineteen Eighty-Four-like "logic."

* Look back at what Jason Hu told the Taipei Times back in 2001 when he was running for mayor.

* Taiwan Echo writes about the return to days of dictatorship -- and beyond: Ma to Send More Military Instructors to Campus -- Elementary Schools Included

* Part 13 of my series of posts on "the erosion of justice in Taiwan" contains links to all the open letters, the responses, and my earlier comments.

Facially-tattooed tears: Taiwan, 台灣, Ma Ying-jeou, 馬英九, Taichung City, 台中市, Jason Hu, 胡志強, gangs, 黑道, police, 警察, ECFA, 經濟合作架構協議, referendum, 公投

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!

Taiwanese demand a referendum on ECFA

2010-05-20T21:47:00.000+08:00

Be there, or watch it live

Approximately 60% of Taiwanese of all political stripes support a referendum on the so-called "cross-Strait" [sic -- it should be between two countries] Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA, 經濟合作架構協議) which President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) insists will be signed in June.

If you can't be there either today (Thursday, May 20, 2010), tomorrow, or Saturday, you can watch the protest live via Ustream:
Online video chat by Ustream
For more info visit the ECFA Referendum Alliance (ECFA 公投行動聯盟) site directly.

And never forget what Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao (溫家寶) said about ECFA being one step toward "complete unification of the motherland [sic]":

0:35 YouTube video: "DPP ECFA referendum ad - with English titles"

Ballots: Taiwan, 台灣, Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, 經濟合作架構協議, ECFA, referendum, 公投, protest, 抗議

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!

Clarifying distortions about Taiwan's relations with China

2010-05-15T02:17:00.001+08:00

Nat Bellocchi puts things in focus

Voice of America image of
Nat Bellocchi via NTDTV

Former American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) Chairman Nat Bellocchi had an editorial piece titled "The myth about reducing tension" in Friday's Taipei Times. In the eye-opening piece, Bellocchi deconstructs the illusion of the "reduction of tension" between Taiwan and China.

It deserves to be read in full, so here's the whole piece [highlights mine]:

In a world filled with political tension, cutthroat economic competition and even open warfare, many people long for a reduction of tension, leading to more peace and stability among nations. As such, it was no surprise that when the newly elected Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government started its policy of rapprochement with China in the spring of 2008, the US welcomed the "reduction of tension" across the Taiwan Strait.

The question is whether there really has been a long-term "reduction of tension" and whether that means long-running disagreements might be resolved.

It is a fact that for the past two years the People's Republic of China (PRC) has been less bellicose than it was during the eight years of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) administration. However, that is only true because China sees "Taiwan" as moving in its direction, increasing the likelihood that in due time it will be able to force Taiwan — through economic and political means — into some kind of political unification. [Maddog note: While the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is moving in China's direction, the people of Taiwan are not.]

The present "reduction of tension" is thus artificial in nature as it is predicated on Taiwan capitulating under duress to China in the long run. That is tantamount to saying that law-abiding people giving in to mafia threats reduces tension, when in reality the underlying tension is caused by the aggressor. Now, what will happen if the Taiwanese decide — for whatever reasons — to not re-elect President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) in 2012 and a DPP government returns to power? Such a government would want to maintain peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait, but at the same time retain Taiwan's hard-won freedom, democracy and independence.

It is easy to predict that such a new policy would be labeled as "increasing tension" by the defeated KMT as well as by the PRC itself. It is thus an ironic contradiction that attempts to consolidate Taiwan's democracy and its acceptance by the international community may be seen in some quarters as "increasing tension."

For those who study Taiwan and observe it closely, there are other seeming contradictions: Shirley Kan of the Congressional Research Service in Washington mentioned three of them during a recent seminar at George Washington University: one, if you want consensus, don't call it a consensus (referring to the so-called "1992 consensus" which has been a divisive issue in Taiwan); two, if you want independence, don't say so; and three, if the US wants to reduce the threat of conflict in the Taiwan Strait, it has to sell arms to Taiwan.

Against this background, what should the US say or do? For one, it should be more careful in referring to the present trend as "reducing tension."

There can only be a true reduction of tension if China moves in the direction of accepting Taiwan for what it is — a lively democracy that wants to chart its own course and determine its own future without undue pressure from the Chinese side.

There is no evidence that China accepts or will ever accept this point. It continues its military buildup, has hardly moved on giving Taiwan international space and continues its attempts to lock Taiwan into a position of dependence through economic means.

The US thus needs to be more insistent on reducing the Chinese military threat against Taiwan and on the issue of increasing international space for Taiwan.

A good start would be for the US to fully support Taiwan's membership in international organizations as stipulated in the Taiwan Relations Act and to refrain from anachronistic statements that it only support membership in organizations "that do not require statehood."

The US also needs to do better at creating an atmosphere wherein efforts by Taiwan's government to consolidate democracy and increase its international presence are seen as enhancing long-term peace and stability in the Strait — in spite of possible objections from a still quite repressive government in Beijing.

The basic idea is that — instead of Taiwan moving in the direction of Beijing — the PRC should move in the direction of freedom and democracy. Only then can there be any substantive "reduction of tension."

Further reading:
* Full text of the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA)

* September 3, 2007: Ma Ying-jeou seriously misrepresents Taiwan Relations Act

* April 12, 2009: Taiwan Relations Act at 30 (Michael Turton points out a common misconception about the US' "obligations" related to the TRA.)

Wiseguys: Taiwan, 台灣, Nat Bellocchi, 白樂崎, memes, 大腦模仿病毒, China, 中國, People's Republic of China, 中華人民共和國, PRC

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!

Ralph Jennings pushes anti-Taiwan, pro-Ma propaganda

2010-04-26T01:54:00.007+08:00

Inexcusable biases

A problematic Reuters piece titled "Taiwan president, opposition clash over China deal" appeared online less than an hour after the close of a debate Sunday afternoon between Taiwan's president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and DPP chairwoman Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文). The topic of the debate was the controversial Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA), which Ma has been touting as "urgent" without providing any concrete details regarding the content to the public or to opposition parties.

19:35 YouTube video: "ECFA 第一階段申論"
Translation: ECFA [Debate] Part 1: Introductory Remarks
A reader e-mailed me about Jennings' "false statement[s]" within [that's a direct quote]:

The debate, a new step in Taiwan's democracy, is expected to sway public opinion towards an economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) set to be signed with China in June.

You've got to be kidding me! Jennings -- who has previously labeled me as a "sniper" for calling out his lies -- has some nerve. He would have to be hiding under a rock to actually be unaware of previous debates between political adversaries in Taiwan. (Does he mean something else? Whether this so-called "professional" writer and/or his editors are trying to deceive us on purpose is uncertain.)

But when Jennings -- working for a wire service whose reports get carried far and wide -- claims that this particular debate is "expected" to do just what Ma wants it to, this functions as the "carpet bombing" variety of propaganda. (My e-mail correspondent notes that the article is already being carried in the Malaysia Star and the Straits Times.)

Who is "expect[ing]" this kind of result from the debate? You might think Jennings would provide at least one example of who it is that thinks in a way which precisely benefits Ma. But he doesn't.

The article also drops this unbecoming description of Ma's opponent in the very next paragraph:

"If we don't do this deal, what else can we do? The rest of Asia is forming alliances," Ma said, his voice rising, as he stood beside anti-China opposition Democratic Progressive Party chairwoman Tsai Ing-wen.

Why does Ralph Jennings hate neutral reporting? He could have noted how Tsai's party opened trade to China (which Jennings knows is targeting Taiwan with over 1,500 missiles) -- just without sacrificing Taiwan's sovereignty in the process.

Jennings also "generously" (from Ma's perspective) provided this generalization near the bottom of the article:

Television pundits were split on who fared better, giving the island's colourful media talk shows and staunchly divided public plenty to talk about.

Which "television pundits"? Jennings doesn't/won't specify, but if you want to read about some numbers I saw during and after the debate about "who fared better," just follow that link. Unlike Jennings, I even say where I found those numbers.

UPDATE: Here's an online poll by Yahoo asking who did a better job in the debate. The current results are:
* Tsai Ing-wen: 3,682 (59.1%)
* Ma Ying-jeou: 2,333 (37.4%)
* Neither: 216 (3.5%)
[/update]

The craptastic conclusion?
That's anti-Taiwan Ralph Jennings for ya! Go see what other unappetizing things (e.g., positive descriptions of Ma and/or China, unchallenged counterfactual claims, etc.) you can find in his "reporting."

Further reference:
Taiwan's Public Television Service (PTS, 公共電視) uploaded videos of the entire debate to YouTube. The first segment of the series is at the top of this post. Here are the remaining segments:
* ECFA 第二階段交互詰問（1） Translation: Segment 2, Q & A (1)
* ECFA 第二階段交互詰問（2） Translation: Segment 2, Q & A (2)
* ECFA 第二階段交互詰問（3） Translation: Segment 2, Q & A (3)
* ECFA 第二階段交互詰問（4） Translation: Segment 2, Q & A (4)
* ECFA 第二階段交互詰問（5） Translation: Segment 2, Q & A (5)
* ECFA 第三階段結論 Translation: Segment 3, Closing Remarks (5)

* Perhaps this is the sort of place Ralph Jennings finds such "expectations." After the Sunday debate, the deep-blue TVBS did a survey of 906 Taiwanese over the age of 20. With a margin of error of 3.2 percent, it said that "support for ECFA increased by 3 percentage points" [163 kb PDF file] since a survey four days earlier.

Ghouls and strangulations: Taiwan, 台灣, Reuters, 路透社, Ralph Jennings, 唐甯思, propaganda, 宣傳, ECFA, 經濟合作架構協議, debate, 辯論, Ma Ying-jeou, 馬英九 Tsai Ing-wen, 蔡英文

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!

Wu Den-yih and his medicine show

2010-04-06T06:04:00.003+08:00

Is he, too, "selling snake oil"?

The Central News Agency (中央社) reported about a week and a half ago (Thursday, March 25, 2010) that Taiwan's Premier Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) (Chinese Nationalist Party [KMT]) will start cracking down on fake medicines [translation mine]:

查緝偽劣藥政院取締小組動起來

Executive Yuan prohibition group initiates crackdown on fake medicines

（中央社記者謝佳珍台北25日電）為打擊不法藥物，行政院長吳敦義今天指示成立聯合取締小組，加強稽查地下電台、夜市、攤販、情趣商店等偽劣假藥販售通路，並請衛生署在3個月內修法加重販售偽劣假藥罰責。

(CNA reporter Hsieh Chia-chen [ph], [reporting from] Taipei, [March] 25) In order to combat fake medicines, Premier Wu Den-yih established a task force to investigate pirate ["underground"] radio stations, night markets, street vendors, adult novelty stores, and other fake medicine outlets. He also asked the Department of Health to make stricter laws regarding fake medicines along with harsher punishments for violations.

Here's the same story as covered in the Friday, March 26, 2006 edition of the Taipei Times:

A cross-agency task force will be established to combat counterfeit drugs and medical products sold via underground radio stations, the Internet and night markets, the Executive Yuan and the Department of Health announced yesterday.

Sounds like a pretty good idea, right? The problem is that "underground radio stations" is dog-whistle politics to Chinese KMT supporters:

Dog-whistle politics, also known as the use of code words, is a term for a type of political campaigning or speechmaking which employs coded language that appears to mean one thing to the general population but has a different or more specific meaning for a targeted subgroup of the audience

To these folks, "underground radio" is equivalent to "southern Taiwan," "pro-Taiwan," ""pro-DPP," and/or "anti-China," and words like those (and "fake medicines" -- which are often associated with the sponsorship of such stations) get them salivating. While a lot of discussion is already focusing on the upcoming (November 27, 2010) special municipality elections, this is an obvious attempt by the Chinese KMT to stir up their base with irrational hatred.

This is all a sham, as the following info will reveal.

The kicker
What do you think "legal" pro-Chinese KMT TV and radio stations do for whole days at a time? If you said, "Sell medicine," you'd be onto something.

Take a gander at the following screenshots from some of those blue-affiliated TV stations (and see if you can spot a familiar face in the crowd):

I'm no pirate! I've got a lab coat and a toupee! (Does it make me a Dr?) (Click to enlarge)	If you wouldn't eat cat poop or poison ivy, you should think twice about taking this, too. (Click to enlarge)	If I move a walker away and stand up, will you believe I used to need it? (Click to enlarge)
Somebody gave me FK23, so I took it. LOL Could've been FM2! (Click to enlarge)	Saying it's got no other chemicals doesn't mean it has none at all. (Click to enlarge)	Ma Ying-jeou endorses the guy selling drugs. (Click to enlarge)
Didn't trust Adimmune's H1N1 vaccine? Would you trust this? (Click to enlarge)	This claims to help high BP, diabetes, kidney problems, enuresis, impotence, and more! (Click to enlarge)	Whatever you've got, take our pills. You might not get better, but we'll profit! (Click to enlarge)

Wait! Is that KMT chairman/President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) I see? By George! It most certainly is!

And no, these aren't just commercials. Whole shows use questionable methods to sell these questionable products. (All of the screenshots above were captured between 2:53 and 3:51 PM on Saturday, March 27, 2010.) Do you think Wu's "crackdown" will affect these "above-ground" TV stations at all? Will President Ma be caught in their dragnet?

Keep your eyes on this story, but don't bet anything of value on it.

Further reading:
For earlier examples of the use of this specific tactic, search for the word "radio" in these older posts, or at least hover on the links below for a preview (original posts have links to further information):

* December 15, 2006: "10 or so sources of KMT brainwashing"

* June 2, 2007: "Behind the China Post's curtain ... lies a big conflict of interest"

* September 24, 2008: "Ma Ying-jeou's survey dips to a new low"

* The Liberty Times (自由時報) thinks Wu's "crackdown" is an attempt to shut out voices opposed to ECFA. (Hat tip to A-gu)

Industry standards: Taiwan, 台灣, Chinese KMT, 中國國民黨, Wu Den-yih, 吳敦義, Ma Ying-jeou, 馬英九, propaganda, 宣傳, underground radio, 地下電台

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!

U.S. Census 2010: write in "Taiwanese"

2010-03-08T21:26:00.003+08:00

Now's your chance: You be you!

A group of Taiwanese-Americans produced this great video below as part of a campaign to address the problem of their group's underrepresentation and to fix it -- or to at least get the ball rolling -- in the United States Census 2010.

In previous censuses, many Taiwanese -- including ones who wrote in "Taiwanese" -- were counted as being "Chinese." With your help, perhaps things can change this time around. Please spread the word, and encourage people affected by this situation to participate in the movement.

2:38 YouTube video: "Write in "Taiwanese" - US Census 2010 [PSA Full Version]"
Further reading:
* United States Census 2010. Taiv✓anese! Be counted. Be recognized.

* Behind the Scenes of Census 2010: Write in "Taiwanese" | Passion Project

Choose one or more: Taiwan, 台灣, Taiwanese, 台灣人, Taiwanese-Americans, 台美人, census, 人口普查

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!

Taiwan's DPP wins big in latest legislative by-elections

2010-02-27T22:30:00.002+08:00

Three out of four ain't bad

Today in Taoyuan, Hsinchu, Chiayi, and Hualien, Taiwan's Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) won three of the four elections which were held to replace legislators elected to other positions in last December's 3-in-1 election.

Huang Jen-chu (黃仁杼) beat Apollo Chen (陳學聖) and two "independent" candidates in Taoyuan, Peng Shao-chin (彭紹瑾) beat Cheng Yung-tang (鄭永堂) in Hsinchu, and Chen Ming-wen (陳明文) summarily kicked Lin Te-jui's (林德瑞) ass and handed it to him on a plate (57,451 to 27,138) in Chiayi.

In Hualien, which is known as a Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) stronghold, DPP candidate Hsiao Bi-khim (蕭美琴) came in second place, but she got an impressiive 40.8% of the votes running against the winner, KMT candidate Wang Ting-sheng (王廷升), and "independent" Shih Sheng-lang (施勝郎).

Here are unofficial numbers given by various TV stations after either victories had been declared or losses conceded in all districts.

5:35 PM results via ETTV (Click to enlarge)	5:37 PM results via CTiTV (Click to enlarge)
5:37 PM results via FTV (Click to enlarge)
5:37 PM results via TVBS (Click to enlarge)	5:39 PM results via SETN (Click to enlarge)

So far, there have been no reports of losing KMT candidates trying to shoot anybody.

Anyway, I'm looking forward to the next elections in December 2010 so Taiwan's voters can clean things up some more.

Further reading:
* Here are the vote counts for all candidates via the Liberty Times.

* Download MS Excel spreadsheets (Hanzi) of official results from the Central Election Commission (CEC) web site.

Front row seats: Taiwan, 台灣, election, 選舉

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!

Open Letter from the producer of Formosa Betrayed

2010-02-27T04:37:00.000+08:00

Putting Taiwan in the spotlight

Will Tiao, the producer of the film "Formosa Betrayed" (被出賣的台灣), which is being released across the United States today, sent this around [emphasis mine]:

Dear Friends,

This weekend, February 26-28, a new movie about Taiwan will be coming to theaters. Formosa Betrayed is the first American film to ever deal with US-Taiwan relations and explore the issues of democracy, identity, and justice during the White Terror period in Taiwan. The movie was largely funded by Taiwanese all over the United States and Canada, who invested over $6 million into the film. This makes Formosa Betrayed one of the largest pro-Taiwan projects ever funded by the overseas Taiwanese community. Most of these investors are not wealthy -- they are hard working individuals who came to America to provide a better life for their children.

I am one of those children.

My parents are from Kaohsiung, Taiwan. While growing up, they taught me to call myself "Taiwanese," not "Chinese." This caused them much hardship, which included being put on a blacklist. Some of their friends had worse things happen to them. In some cases, people were killed.

The Taiwanese people have suffered at the hands of many over the last century, but these stories have rarely been told or heard. As a second generation Taiwanese American, I feel it is my duty to educate my generation, as well as the world, about the struggles and suffering of the Taiwanese. We cannot allow Taiwan's history and its people's hardships to be forgotten. Once that happens, it only becomes a matter of time before these atrocities are repeated. This is precisely why I dedicated the last five years of my life to bringing the story of Formosa Betrayed to the world.

As the turbulent reaction to President Obama's recent arms sale to Taiwan shows, US-China-Taiwan relations is still a touchy subject that is greeted by fleeting interest, faint support, or --perhaps worst of all-- indifference by the American media. I am hoping the release of Formosa Betrayed will help spur greater awareness and wider discussion about these important matters in the United States and abroad. This is why I am urging you to see Formosa Betrayed this weekend with your friends and family -- to enlighten them about Taiwan's embattled legacy and its struggle for democracy.

Thank you for your time and interest.

All the best,

Will Tiao
President, Formosa Films
Producer, Formosa Betrayed

Remember that this film is based upon important real events in Taiwan's history, and do everything within your power to see it.

Daily rushes: Taiwan, 台灣, open letter, 公開信, Formosa Betrayed, 被出賣的台灣, White Terror, 白色恐怖, Chinese Nationalist Party, 中國國民黨, Kuomintang, KMT, 國民黨

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!

Lunar New Year in Taiwan: 2010

2010-02-13T05:12:00.001+08:00

A twofer holiday!

In addition to being Valentine's Day, February 14, 2010 (Sunday) is New Year's Day as celebrated in several Asian countries. Many people use the term "Chinese New Year" to describe the holiday, despite the fact that the direct back-translation "中國新年" is rarely used; furthermore, it doesn't just belong to the Chinese.

Here's something from a couple of earlier posts related to why many people prefer to call this holiday "Lunar New Year" (Taiwanese: Lông li̍k sin nî; Hanzi: 農曆新年; Hanyu pinyin: Nónglìxīnnián):

It doesn't just belong to the Chinese

Nor is it just "politically correct." Read about it in English and/or Chinese.

Happy Lunar New Year! 萬事如意! [=van.su_ru.yi! / wàn shì rú yì!]

UPDATE:Being in a bit of a rush to begin my vacation, I missed these links (all are presented in both English and Mandarin):* How the people of Vietnam celebrate Lunar New Year* How the people of South Korea celebrate Lunar New Year* How the people of Singapore celebrate Lunar New Year* How the people of Malaysia celebrate Lunar New Year

And here's an update on the Taiwanese romanization which I derived by using an online dictionary on the Ministry of Education (MOE) web site:

袂記得 [bē-kì-tit/buē-kì-tit]: Every time you say "Lunar New Year," a Chinese KMT'er cries. Lông li̍k sin nî khuài lo̍k (農曆新年快樂！) Bān sū jû ì! (萬事如意！)

And as some people also say, Happy Taiwanese New Year!

Codecs: Taiwan, 台灣, China, 中國, Lunar New Year, 農曆新年

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!

Debate on erosion of justice in Taiwan continues

2010-02-09T04:55:00.004+08:00

Part XIII

Michael Danielsen, chairman of Denmark's Taiwan Corner and one of the signatories of the Open letter to President Ma Ying-jeou last November, rebuts Government Information Office Minister Su Jun-pin's (蘇俊賓) response to Richard Kagan last month with a piece in today's Taipei Times titled "Democratic liberty is fundamental."

Here are some excerpts from Danielsen's piece:

[Su] states that the government will give "due attention to possible flaws in our judicial system" and continued by stating that it will "keep pushing forward on these fronts."

I look forward to actual steps that go beyond mere words. [...]

[...]

In its report, Freedom House refers to violations of the rights of defendants in criminal cases and other new restrictions on freedom of expression and news freedom. In addition, Jerome Cohen [Maddog note: Ma Ying-jeou's (馬英九) Harvard professor] and Chen Yu-jie (陳玉潔) stated in the South China Morning Post on Jan. 20 that now "it [the government] is trying to introduce legislation to punish 'obstructions of justice' that will inevitably restrict defense lawyers' activities." [Maddog note: Cohen and Chen's unedited original letter; The edited version which appeared in the SCMP (PDF); Hanzi version which appeared in the Taiwan-based China Times (中國時報)]

Thus, using history over the last two decades to showcase Taiwan's democratic development is deceptive.

Su seems to have a different understanding of democratic involvement than others. Based on his words, cross-strait relations are only important to the legislature if they are related to law, and the public should only have involvement between elections via the media. However, the agreements involving China and Taiwan deal with the key issue of Taiwan's future and its existence as a free and democratic nation, and for that reason the agreements are always important to the legislature and the public because of tensions with China and that country's obvious threats to Taiwan.

Notice how Su doesn't admit to any "actual" flaws -- only "possible" ones -- and that his use of the phrase "keep pushing forward" implies that his government is already making improvements on the judicial system in Taiwan. Anyone who has paid any amount of attention to this administration will know that it is not so. Danielsen implies as much by saying that he'd like to see "actual steps" as opposed to "mere words." As usual, the retorts make much more sense than the responses from the Ma government have. Look at the reality, test the logic, and you'll see.

UPDATE: Taipei Times editor J. Michael Cole writes on his blog how the Presidential Office snubbed the foreign media on ECFA briefings -- not a good indication of anything "improving" under Ma Ying-jeou:

The Taiwan Foreign Correspondent's Club (TFCC) yesterday lodged a protest with the Presidential Office after being informed that foreign reporters would not be allowed to attend Ma's briefing. The directive is expected to apply to all subsequent monthly briefings. The TFCC was told that foreign correspondents would be able to watch in real time from the Presidential Office press room.

[...]

I communicated this with Reporters Without Borders Asia, which responded by calling it a "disturbing development."

How "transparent" is that? [/update]

The prequels
Here are the 12 previous episodes of this long-running series, listed below in chronological order:

* November 6, 2008: Scholars and writers from around the world publish an "Open letter on erosion of justice in Taiwan." The same letter -- as an online petition -- has been signed by more than 2,000 people.

* November 25, 2008: Minister of Justice Wang Ching-feng (王清峰) calls the open letter "inaccurate."

* December 2, 2008: "Eroding justice: Open letter No. 2" counters Wang Ching-feng's claims.

* January 8, 2009: Over a month later, Wang Ching-feng comes up with "clarif[ications]" regarding the open-letter writers' so-called "misunderstandings."

* January 21, 2009: "Eroding justice: Open letter No. 3" is addressed to President Ma Ying-jeou.

* January 24, 2009: Two more "US-based Taiwan experts add [their] names to open letter [No. 3]."

* January 25, 2009: President Ma claims the public had gained confidence in the judiciary in 2008 -- the exact opposite of what this Taiwan News article tells us they actually felt:
According to recent surveys conducted by Academia Sinica and the Web site Yahoo! Kimo, over 50 percent of the people do not believe in Taiwan's judicial system and over 75 percent have no confidence that the Judicial Yuan will undertake judicial reform [...]
* May 22, 2009: An estimable group of scholars and writers -- 26 in all, and each one with a deep understanding of Taiwan and the surrounding facts -- has composed an open letter addressed directly to President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九). The letter addresses the ever-increasing problems with judicial fairness, press freedom, the lack of transparency in the Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) rapprochement with China, the loss of Taiwan's sovereignty, and the loss of human rights. The argument the letter makes is rock solid. It is based on demonstrable facts.

* November 9, 2009: Then there were 31. The Taiwan News publishes an "Open letter to President Ma Ying-jeou by 30 international scholars" which reminds us that "a decrease of tension across the Taiwan Strait would indeed be welcome, but [...] that this should not be done at the expense of the hard-won democracy" and that "Taiwan should be more fully accepted by the international community as a full and equal partner." (Here's a version with 31 names on the web site of one of the signatories, Jerome F. Keating, Ph.D.)

* December 13, 2009: Government Information Office (GIO) Minister Su Jun-pin (蘇俊賓) submits the "GIO response to Nov. [9] open letter" to the Taipei Times.

* December 25, 2009: Richard Kagan, professor emeritus at Hamline University in St Paul, Minnesota and one of the signatories of the November 2009 letter, replies to Su Jun-pin's silliness in "GIO's response misses the point"

* January 8, 2009: Government Information Office (GIO) Minister Su Jun-pin (蘇俊賓) churns out A GIO response to Richard Kagan (one of the signatories of the November 9, 2009 "Open letter to President Ma Ying-jeou by 30 international scholars") in which Su compares apples and oranges by imagining that other people don't know that China wants to annex Taiwan while the Taiwanese people don't want to be part of China, ignores what has happened to Hong Kong in the past 12 and a half years, talks about the "double-taxation" issue as if China won't still get those taxes from Taiwanese businesses, pretends to forget that Taiwan's Straits [sic] Exchange Foundation (海峽交流基金會) chairman and Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) vice-chairman Chiang Pin-kung (江丙坤) referred to himself as a "rubber stamp," complains that his government has no control over anything, ignores the KMT's continued attempts to take over Taiwan's Public TV (PTS, 公共電視), confuses gains in local elections with a balanced legislature and a president who listens to majority opinion without oppressing minorities or stupidly saying out loud that he "sees them as humans," and completely omits the fact that the talks regarding an Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) -- which Chinese officials say "will certainly bring about complete unification of the motherland [sic] -- have been anything but transparent and have not been subject to legislative oversight. These things, Mr. Su, are clear signs of an erosion of both justice and democracy.

How long will this go on? Until the people of Taiwan kick the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) out for good -- that's how long!

Cast of characters: Taiwan, 台灣, erosion of justice, 侵蝕司法, Su Jun-pin, 蘇俊賓, Michael Danielsen, 麥可丹尼爾森

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!

ECFA is being signed under a one-China framework

2010-01-26T05:28:00.002+08:00

In case you still had any doubts...

It should be obvious to anyone not in a persistent vegetative state (and even that might not be enough of an obstacle to miss this) that the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) being "negotiated" between the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) in Taiwan and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is annexing Taiwan to China.

Today's Taipei Times contains the money quotes:

MAC [Maddog note: the so-called "Mainland" Affairs Council] Deputy Minister Liu Te-shun (劉德勳) said that under the Act Governing Relations between the Peoples of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area (台灣地區與大陸地區人民關係條例), the relationship between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait is "region to region."

"The legislature passed the law in 1992 and since then such a legal status has never been changed no matter who is in power, including former presidents Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) and Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) or [President] Ma Ying-jeou," Liu said.

"Such a theory is not something new invented by President Ma and that is why the trade pact is called a cross-strait economic framework agreement," he said.

Liu made the remarks after being asked by the Taipei Times at a press conference yesterday morning to clarify Ma's comments describing cross-strait ties as being "between two regions."

Liu also said the administration did not want to specify a timeframe for the signing of a free-trade agreement (FTA) with China within an ECFA.

He did not say why, only emphasizing that cross-strait ties were "special."

One thing stands out here: The Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) government is not treating China like the foreign (enemy) country that it is.

And in case you've forgotten how that foreign (enemy) country on the other side of the Taiwan Strait sees the ECFA, listen to their premier, Wen Jiabao (溫家寶):

0:35 YouTube video: "DPP ECFA referendum ad - with English titles"
Further reading:
* Wikisource: Act Governing Relations between Peoples of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area

* GlobalSecurity.org: Remembering when (then-premier, now-VP) Vincent Siew (蕭萬長) and (then-MAC Chairman, now-National Security Council Secretary-General) Su Chi (蘇起) agreed with (then-president) Lee Teng-hui's (李登輝) "state-to-state" theory of relations between Taiwan and China.

More red flags: Taiwan, 台灣, Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, 經濟合作架構協議, ECFA, Mainland [sic] Affairs Council, 大陸委員會, MAC, Liu Te-shun, 劉德勳, Ma Ying-jeou, 馬英九, Wen Jiabao, 溫家寶, annexation, 併吞

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!

Big win for Taiwan's DPP

2010-01-10T01:19:00.002+08:00

Sweeping those dirty counties clean!

All three of yesterday's by-elections to choose new legislators in Taoyuan (桃園), Taichung (台中), and Taitung (台東) Counties -- all Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) strongholds -- were won by pro-Taiwan opposition Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) candidates, and won by surprising margins.

While the Taitung by-election was held to replace Justin Huang (黃健庭), who resigned his legislative position before being elected as Taitung County commissioner, the Taichung and Taoyuan elections were held to replace Chinese KMT politicians whose elections were annulled due to vote-buying convictions: Liao Cheng-ching (廖正井) in Taoyuan and Chiang Lien-fu (江連福) in Taichung.

Here are the numbers for the two major parties extracted from a press release (MS Word .doc file) available on the Central Election Commission (CEC) web site (percentage calculations mine, "non-partisan" candidates' votes included in calculating totals):

Taoyuan: DPP = 53,633 (58.05%) / KMT = 36,989 (40.01%)
Taichung: DPP = 63,335 (55.02%) / KMT = 51,776 (44.98%)
Taitung: DPP = 23,190 (49.46%) / KMT = 21,215 (45.25%)
The Sunday Taipei Times has an English-language chart (in image format) of the same numbers I show above, but including the other candidates.

Implications
The DPP now holds 30 legislative seats (compared to the Chinese KMT's 74 seats), giving them the power to initiate recall proceedings against President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) or propose amendments to the constitution.

Considering the gains made by the DPP in last month's election and this one, I'm looking forward to the February 27, 2010 by-election (to replace more legislators who were elected as county commissioners in the December 5, 2009 3-in-1 election) to demonstrate a real trend.

FURTHER READING:
* Taipei Times: "DPP wins all three seats in by-elections"

* Taiwan News: "Sweep shows voice of Taiwan people, says DPP leader"

* Taiwan News: "DPP will not launch presidential recall at legislature"

* Radio Taiwan International: "DPP takes all three legislative by-election seats "

* Straits Times (Singapore): "Taiwan opposition scores win"

* Reuters' Kelvin Soh and Ralph Jennings "report," Nick Macfie edits: "Taiwan anti-China opposition gains legislative seats" (Note the use of "anti-China" instead of "pro-Taiwan" -- putting the onus for the antipathy on the wrong side -- and so much more anti-Taiwan BS within.)

* AFP: "Taiwan opposition scores fresh election win" (Note the big zombie lie within the piece which says: "The self-ruled island and China split in 1949 after a civil war.")

Participants: Taiwan, 台灣, election, 選舉, Democratic Progressive Party, 民主進步黨, DPP, 民進黨, Chinese Nationalist Party, 中國國民黨, Kuomintang, KMT, 國民黨, Ralph Jennings, 唐甯思

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!

Taiwan's "Erosion of Justice" saga continues

2010-01-09T00:49:00.002+08:00

A course in dissembling

Beginning in November 2008, when former President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) was first jailed after a long trial by media, a series of open letters on the erosion of justice in Taiwan under the administration of current President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) began. Fourteen months later, the deceptive replies to these letters still come, and each time, they fail to honestly and logically address the issues within. Below, I will discuss the latest of these replies.

January 8, 2009
Government Information Office (GIO) Minister Su Jun-pin (蘇俊賓) churned out "A GIO response to Richard Kagan" (Professor Emeritus of History at Hamline University and one of the signatories of the November 9, 2009 "Open letter to President Ma Ying-jeou by 30 international scholars" who separately wrote a criticism of Su's nonsensical reply to an earlier open letter). Kagan's letter appeared in the Taipei Times exactly two weeks prior but was not covered here on this blog.

However, I must tackle this "response" which is riddled with problems and avoids addressing the facts in Kagan's letter head-on. I will put Su's response in blockquoted black text, and my comments will appear in full width. To distinguish the single quote from Kagan's letter which appears here, it will appear in green blockquoted text.

After a brief introduction, these are Su's second and third paragraphs:

Professor Kagan expresses doubts about why a democratic country such as the Republic of China (Taiwan) would seek to develop closer relations with mainland China, which is not a democracy. As an historian, he surely must know that all members of the international community should and must develop relations with each other, regardless of differences in political systems or even bilateral disagreements over specific issues. The US engages in trade and security cooperation with non-democratic countries throughout the world, yet few question how this might affect US democracy.

Similarly, the Republic of China needs to develop relations with all members of the international community to ensure the best interests of the people of Taiwan. It is an internationally accepted fact that mainland China is growing in economic and strategic importance. When the international community wishes to solve major international problems, it increasingly finds that it must engage with Beijing to help find a solution. The US is working more closely than ever with the mainland to deal with managing the global financial crisis, handling the North Korean situation and countering global terrorism. As an integral member of the international community, Taiwan needs to engage with mainland China for many of the same reasons, regardless of any cross-strait differences.

Su is comparing apples and oranges by writing as if other people don't realize that China wants to annex Taiwan while the vast majority of Taiwanese people don't want to be part of that authoritarian foreign regime and that those in Beijing hold great leverage over those in Taipei. The phrase "cross-strait differences" doesn't give you any idea that these differences entail the governments of two nations claiming to rule the entirety of each others territory -- dangerous claims which have hung over the lives of people in both countries (but mostly those in Taiwan) for over six decades.

Note how Su says "a democratic country such as the Republic of China (Taiwan)" above, yet in nearly every other case he treats Taiwan as a mere region. How can anyone take him at his word?

Here's Su's next paragraph:

However, this is absolutely not in any way at the expense of Taiwan's hard-won democracy. This administration has consistently stressed since taking office that all its policies and interaction with Beijing shall be based on the principle of "putting Taiwan first for the benefit of the people." If improving ties had led to the appalling result Dr Kagan posits of Beijing controlling the dialogue and always getting what it wants, why was no double taxation avoidance agreement signed during the Chiang-Chen [Straits Exchange Foundation (SEF) Chairman Chiang Pin-kung (江丙坤) and Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait (ARATS) Chairman Chen Yunlin (陳雲林)] cross-strait talks in December, despite being on the agenda? The answer is simple: Disputed details in the wording of the agreement did not accord with the aforementioned principle, so we were not going to sign it, and did not.

He ignores what -- despite promises from Beijing -- has happened to Hong Kong in the past 12 and a half years and talks about the "double taxation" issue as if China won't still benefit by collecting those taxes from Taiwanese businesses. Beijing loses nothing on that point, but Su has weakened the foundation of his own argument.

Su also completely omits the fact that the talks regarding an Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) -- which Chinese officials say "will certainly bring about complete unification of the motherland [sic] -- have been anything but transparent and have not been subject to legislative oversight. Su skirts around this just below with the phrase "involving domestic laws." Read carefully:

The fact that these talks took place between the respectively authorized representative organizations of both sides — the SEF and ARATS — debunks the myth that the cross-strait dialogue is being conducted party-to-party, rather than government-to-government. The Legislative Yuan must approve any accord worked out with ARATS involving domestic laws. Only this administration, duly elected by the voters in Taiwan — and not any political party at either end of the political spectrum — sets cross-strait policy and speaks on behalf of the people of Taiwan.

Minister Su acts as if no one heard that Taiwan's Straits [sic] Exchange Foundation (海峽交流基金會) chairman and Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) vice-chairman Chiang Pin-kung (江丙坤) recently referred to himself as nothing but a "rubber stamp" in these so-called negotiations.

There's also the strange issue of why the Ma administration won't allow a referendum on the issue, even though the number of signatures collected to initiate the process was nearly double the required threshold. That's not "speak[ing] on behalf of the people of Taiwan," Mr. Su.

While Su dished out some "tough" talk about how much control this government could exert just two blockquotes above, he does a 180 below and says that his government has no control over anything:

Professor Kagan's letter also dwelled on the disingenuous complaint that using "Chinese Taipei" as the name of our country in international events and organizations signals a deliberate diminution of national sovereignty. Taiwan's participation in such events under the rubric "Chinese Taipei" during previous administrations did not diminish national sovereignty, nor can it do so now. This government has always sought and continues to vigorously seek the use of our official name, "Republic of China," or at least "Taiwan," in such situations. However, given Taiwan's unique international status, use of our national title is beyond our control. We warmly welcome support from Dr Kagan and his colleagues for the correct use of our national title by international events and organizations hereafter.

It actually is entirely under your control whether you choose to participate using such names and whether you do so gladly (as in the World Health Organization [WHO] fiasco which did damage to Taiwan's sovereignty) or under protest, as the DPP would have done.

Su's jeremiad continues:

The mantra that democracy in Taiwan is less robust than before utterly conflicts with reality. Domestic political debate in Taiwan is as spirited and vigorous as ever. The local media scrutinize every action of this administration closely, and public demonstrations on political issues of every kind are commonplace. Any concerns that Taiwan is reverting to one-party rule were surely dispelled by the results of local elections held last month. KMT [Chinese Nationalist Party] candidates for mayor and county magistrate posts received 47.88 percent of the nationwide vote, while DPP [Democratic Progressive Party] candidates garnered 45.32 percent. There is no clearer proof that the people of Taiwan have the absolute power to choose their government.

Here, Su ignores the Chinese KMT's continued drive to take over Taiwan's Public TV (PTS, 公共電視). Furthermore, he confuses gains in city, county, and township elections with having both a balanced legislature and a president who listens to majority opinion without oppressing minorities or stupidly telling aboriginals out loud that "I see you as humans," as Ma did before being elected to office.

Su ends his letter like this:

The people of Taiwan have every reason to be proud of the democracy and freedom they have achieved. Taiwan continues to shape the debate on whether democracy is attainable in the Chinese-speaking world, even as cross-strait ties improve. We remain resolutely confident that the undeniable fact of democratic attainment in Taiwan will ultimately prove just as, or even more, powerful to spur positive developments on the opposite side of the Taiwan Strait. That can only be to the benefit of the people of Taiwan and those of the mainland, as well as the world in general.

Look at the language he uses: "Chinese-speaking world" is a culturally-imperialist phrase which ignores Taiwan's many other languages; "cross-strait" is an adjective which hides the fact that two separate countries are being discussed; and Su's repeated use of the word "mainland" (when he means "China") also reveals how he see's Taiwan's status as a lesser entity. (I'm sure discerning readers can find even more to criticize in the above paragraph.)

The minister also must think that you, the reader, have forgotten that while former President Chen has been in jail for over a year now, the Ma administration's "Ministry of Just Us" apparently still hasn't collected enough real evidence to convincingly convict him of the life sentence which has already been handed down and is instead using judicial pressure to try to get those close to Chen -- even his former housekeeper -- to squeal.

All of these things are clear signs of the continued erosion of justice, freedom of the press, and democracy, even if -- in Mr. Su's mind -- it's all sweetness and light.

Full Political Alchemist
Oh, and by the way, Su didn't dare address this important bit from Professor Kagan's letter which demonstrates the GIO minister's lack of logical skills:

Su claims that Taiwan's ranking in the report on 180 countries issued by Transparency International rose to No. 37. This statement reveals political alchemy at its best. For instance, Taiwan's score in 2007 was 34. Numerically it did rise to 37. But the higher a country gets, the greater the index of corruption. Somalia is rated at No. 180. In fact, Taiwan fell into greater corruption by three points.

Can you say "fail"?

The prequels
Don't forget the earlier parts of this long-running series, listed here in chronological order:

* November 6, 2008: Scholars and writers from around the world publish an "Open letter on erosion of justice in Taiwan." The same letter -- as an online petition -- has been signed by more than 2,000 people.

* November 25, 2008: Minister of Justice Wang Ching-feng (王清峰) calls the open letter "inaccurate."

* December 2, 2008: "Eroding justice: Open letter No. 2" counters Wang Ching-feng's claims.

* January 8, 2009: Over a month later, Wang Ching-feng comes up with "clarif[ications]" regarding the open-letter writers' so-called "misunderstandings."

* January 21, 2009: "Eroding justice: Open letter No. 3" is addressed to President Ma Ying-jeou.

* January 24, 2009: Two more "US-based Taiwan experts add [their] names to open letter [No. 3]."

* January 25, 2009: President Ma claims the public had gained confidence in the judiciary in 2008 -- the exact opposite of what this Taiwan News article tells us they actually felt:
According to recent surveys conducted by Academia Sinica and the Web site Yahoo! Kimo, over 50 percent of the people do not believe in Taiwan's judicial system and over 75 percent have no confidence that the Judicial Yuan will undertake judicial reform [...]
* May 22, 2009: An estimable group of scholars and writers -- 26 in all, and each one with a deep understanding of Taiwan and the surrounding facts -- has composed an open letter addressed directly to President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九). The letter addresses the ever-increasing problems with judicial fairness, press freedom, the lack of transparency in the Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) rapprochement with China, the loss of Taiwan's sovereignty, and the loss of human rights. The argument the letter makes is rock solid. It is based on demonstrable facts.

* November 9, 2009: Then there were 31. The Taiwan News publishes an "Open letter to President Ma Ying-jeou by 30 international scholars" which reminds us that "a decrease of tension across the Taiwan Strait would indeed be welcome, but [...] that this should not be done at the expense of the hard-won democracy" and that "Taiwan should be more fully accepted by the international community as a full and equal partner." (Here's a version with 31 names on the web site of one of the signatories, Jerome F. Keating, Ph.D.)

* December 13, 2009: Government Information Office (GIO) Minister Su Jun-pin (蘇俊賓) submits the "GIO response to Nov. [9] open letter" to the Taipei Times.

* December 25, 2009: Richard Kagan, professor emeritus at Hamline University in St Paul, Minnesota and one of the signatories of the November 2009 letter, replies to Su Jun-pin's silliness in "GIO's response misses the point"

Don't expect this to end anytime soon.

In the meantime, never let your guard down. Stay angry, and fight this injustice every chance you get -- whether it's writing a blog, attending protests, reminding your mother-in-law that not "all politicians are alike" (especially when it comes to Taiwan's two biggest parties), pointing out to your doctors that the lie-filled pro-Ma TV stations blaring in the waiting room aren't good for their patients' physical or mental health, or even just by actively using the name "China" instead of "mainland" out of mere habit when referring to our bellicose neighbor.

And if you're registered to vote in today's elections in Taichung, Taoyuan, or Taitung -- the first two of which are being held as the result of Chinese KMT vote-buying convictions -- get out and vote for the DPP candidate in your area.

Good people must prevail against injustice.

Dockets for deliberation: Taiwan, 台灣, open letter, 公開信, Su Jun-pin, 蘇俊賓, Richard Kagan, 柯義耕, justice, 正義, Ministry of Justice, 法務部

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!

Chinese students in Taiwan say it's bad to hate the Beijing butchers

2009-12-30T02:58:00.001+08:00

People who don't know much about freedom of speech

On Thursday, December 24, 2009, Chinese dissident Wang Dan (王丹) gave a speech at Taichung's Providence University (靜宜大學). The day before his speech, flyers advertising the speech had been distributed all around the campus, but by the day of the event, they had either disappeared or been ripped up.

What kind of person or people do you think would have had a reason to do that sort of thing?

Ten Chinese students showed up to attend the speech, seven of whom sat right up front. Although they were a minority in the audience, they took up much of the discussion time with long, rambling, and hostile questions.

Free speech is something their own government won't permit, but while in Taiwan, these Chinese students used that freedom to disparage Wang for hating the Beijing butchers responsible for the Tiananmen Square Massacre (天安門大屠殺) of June 4, 1989.

Here's some video from FTV News (民視新聞) about what happened:

2:44 YouTube video: "Chinese students in Taiwan say it's bad to hate the Beijing butchers"
Contemporary Monthly (當代雜誌) editor-in-chief Chin Heng-wei (金恆煒) compared the students' behavior to that of the infamous Red Guards of China's tragic "Cultural Revolution" (無產階級文化大革命) whose violent attacks against people violated its own rule that "persuasion rather than force was to be used." We've seen the same sort of violent, nationalistic behavior from Chinese at soccer games in their own country, the Olympic Torch Relay in other countries, and at a recent speech by a Taiwanese student in S. Korea who "dared" to hold up a small ROC flag. Don't fool yourself by saying that this is nothing.

Related reading:
* Wang Dan warns of PRC student activity in Taiwan:

Chinese democracy activist Wang Dan (王丹) stirred debate recently over his suspicions that Chinese students may be "conducting organized activities" on college campuses in Taiwan.

In his latest post on Facebook, Wang said he raised the matter because he wanted to remind Taiwanese that this was now taking place in their country.

Wang, who is a guest lecturer at Chengchi University's Graduate Institute of Taiwan History, gave a speech at Providence University in Taichung on Thursday titled "How to See the Real China." During the two-hour event, a group of Chinese students studying in Taiwan challenged Wang, a student leader during the Tiananmen Square Massacre in 1989.

[...]

They accused him of being unfair to the Chinese people because of his hatred for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).

[...]

Wang said he was not making sensational comments to scare the public, adding that student council president at University of Hong Kong, who had previously made comments to the effect that there was no such thing as a Tiananmen Square Massacre on June 4, 1989, was elected following organized voting by Chinese students.

"Taiwanese should take note of these things and not be too naive," Wang said.

Liao said the 70 students who attended the speech were free to ask questions. However, few Taiwanese students were able to do so, as the Chinese students dominated the session. He said that while Wang might have been slightly intimidated by the scene, the atmosphere actually wasn't too bad.

[...]

When a Taiwanese student asked Wang about China's progress on democracy, Liao said, the student took a moment to send "his regards" to a Chinese student who had spoken before him, saying that "the student from China loves his motherland very much. I also love my motherland very much, but I do not love China."

* Wikipedia article: Red Guards (China)

The first students to call themselves "Red Guards" in China were a group of students at the Tsinghua University Middle School [...] Chairman Mao Zedong ordered that the manifesto of the Red Guards be broadcast on national radio and published in the People's Daily newspaper. This action gave the Red Guards political legitimacy, and student groups quickly began to appear across China.

* Liberty Times article (Hanzi): 王丹提警訊在台陸生疑有組織活動 (Wang Dan warns of suspicious organized activities by Chinese students in Taiwan)

* Ben Goren's Letters from Taiwan: Chinese Nationalism and Shades of Indignation

Red flags: Taiwan, 台灣, China, 中國, Wang Dan, 王丹, speech, 演講, Providence University, 靜宜大學, Chinese students, 中國學生, 陸生, Red Guards, 紅衛兵, Chin Heng-wei, 金恆煒, FTV, 民視新聞, YouTube

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!

Media mendacity on Taiwan, December 24, 2009

2009-12-24T23:47:00.003+08:00

Jennings can't read?

Earlier today via Twitter user anitaworld, I came across the latest piece of anti-Taiwan propaganda from Reuters. The headline reads:

One hurt, six detained in Taiwan scuffle over China

The average reader might not have any idea what's beneath that headline. Is Taiwan "fighting to take over China" or something? Since only a small percentage of people read past the headline, it only serves to create confusion about the situation.

Here's what's going on: The Taiwanese protesters are standing up for their sovereignty while deals compromising Taiwan's sovereignty are being signed by two authoritarian parties without the people's consent. But Reuters fails to provide you any of that information which is vital to understanding the story.

Although a scant few more details appear within the article, those details are obscured by a mess of unhelpful memes and outright smearing of the victims in this matter, thus canceling any value they might have otherwise contained.

The anatomy of mendacity
The article begins:

TAIPEI (Reuters) - A police officer was hurt and six people detained late on Wednesday during a protest against a visit by China's top negotiator to Taiwan, officials said.

It was the first violence in four days of protests against the visit of Beijing negotiator Chen Yunlin in Taichung, central Taiwan.

There goes Ralph Jennings (whose byline appears at the bottom of the article) phoning it in from Taipei yet again. If he could read (or maybe a quote by Upton Sinclair is what applies here), the Tuesday December 22, 2009 edition of the Taipei Times (that's two days ago) would have informed him of this violence by police:

A Taichung City policeman was penalized yesterday for using pepper spray on two protesters on Sunday night, but the police said his demerit was for carrying non-standard equipment rather than for assaulting the protesters, adding that he acted in self-defense.

Don't mace me, 兄弟!
The actual incident mentioned above took place four days ago (Sunday, December 20, 2009). "[F]irst violence," my ass! The police were the ones who drew "first blood"! Jennings isn't telling you the truth.

Getting back to the Reuters piece, Jennings feeds the readers generalities:

Also on Wednesday, protesters tried to stop Chen from visiting a temple, taunting police that have guarded every step of his December 21-25 visit, local media reported.

Jennings fails to answer some essential questions for the readers: Who were the protesters? (Were they members of the violent China Unification Promotion Party (CUPP, 中華統一促進黨), members of the peaceful Falun Gong movement, common hooligans, or simply citizens of Taiwan who don't want an authoritarian regime to take over their lives?); Why were the protesters there? (Chen Yunlin has previously threatened Taiwan, and he and his comrades are currently trying to annex Taiwan.); How did they try to stop Chen Yunlin? (Did they use weapons [sticks, stones, knives, guns, Molotov cocktails]? [No.], or did they just stand at the scene, hold up signs, and shout? [Yes.]); Which temple was this, and does it have any special significance? (Could it be Chenlan Temple, a temple which is run by a convicted criminal? [Yes!]); Which local media? (I dunno. Jennings doesn't/won't specify.)

Can you feel just how empty of any actual information that paragraph of the article is? He could have used that space much more efficiently if he had instead explained some of the facts to the readers. Ben Goren's blog Letters from Taiwan has a good list from which lazy reporters could simply copy and paste some terse, well-researched facts about Taiwan.

The generalities above are followed directly by this meme:

China has claimed sovereignty over Taiwan since 1949, when Mao Zedong's forces won the Chinese civil war and Chiang Kai-shek's Nationalists fled to the island. Beijing has vowed to bring Taiwan under its rule, by force if necessary.

The full name of the party Jennings is referring to is the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) -- not just the "Nationalists." They fled to Taiwan to save their own asses from Mao Zedong's (毛澤東) Commie bandits (共匪), not to "save Taiwan," as is often purported by those who support the Chinese KMT's authoritarianism.

More importantly, China's "claim" has no legal basis, but Jennings doesn't keep my italicized phrase in his clipboard where he could easily paste it into the article to at least provide some semblance of "balance." And there he goes with that faux-honest "the island" formulation yet again, trying to undermine the fact that Taiwan is an independent country with a population slightly higher than that of the entire "island continent" of Australia (never just "the island [of Australia]").

The article ends with these two paragraphs full of copy-and-paste "journalism" and a byline:

As ties warm under Taiwan's Beijing-friendly President Ma Ying-jeou, economic powerhouse China and the export-reliant island agreed on Tuesday to negotiate a trade deal that would cut tariffs.

Protesters oppose closer ties between the governments.

(Reporting by Ralph Jennings; Editing by David Fox)

FOX News Taiwan?
Let's take down the troubling elements one by one.

Note the positive words ascribed to China and Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九): warm, friendly, powerhouse. Note the diminutives ascribed to Taiwan: reliant, island.

What the protesters oppose is not any sort of ties between "governments." What they oppose is unequal party-to-party negotiations taking place behind closed doors with no opposition oversight whatsoever and which evidence shows to be a series of steps leading up to Taiwan's annexation by two authoritarian regimes working hand-in-hand.

How many average readers would have noticed these things upon first reading them? Far too many ordinary people have become numb to this kind of garbage that passes as "journalism."

The writers whom I have repeatedly criticized apparently won't change, so the readers must wake up, stop falling for this, and wake others up as well. Your most basic human rights and your livelihoods -- if not your lives -- are at stake, and mendacious media therefore amounts to just another form of violence.

Further reading/viewing:
* For better coverage of the story, try this article in the Taipei Times: "CROSS STRAIT TALKS: Police officer injured in Taichung protests."

* For comparison, here's a CNA round-up (in the Taiwan News) of other articles on the incident: "News digest of local media - Clashes."

* Here's a YouTube video of some of the hooligans stationed around the Chenlan Temple: "大甲鎮瀾宮前成自治區，廟方派出紅衣人保護警方維安現場-民視新聞" (Translation: The front of Dajia Township's Chenlan Temple becomes an "autonomous region," people in red [and pink] shirts dispatched to protect police, "preserve order" at the scene - FTV News). Note that in addition to the "uniforms," some of these guys are wearing earpieces, indicating that they're organized and awaiting orders from someone, much like soldiers on a battlefield.

Squiggly lines of BS detection: Taiwan, 台灣, media, 媒體, memes, 大腦模仿病毒, Reuters, 路透社, Ralph Jennings, 唐甯思, Yen Ching-piao, 顏清標, violence, 暴力

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!

DPP protest: info and maps

2009-12-16T22:48:00.002+08:00

Step out and join the fun* on December 20

Despite the protests last November to let him know he is not welcome here, Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait Chairman Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) is coming back to Taiwan to push forward a party-to-party (Chinese Communist Party [CCP]-to-Chinese Nationalist Party [KMT]) Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) which -- in spite of the fact that at least 69% of Taiwanese do not want "unification" with China -- Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao (溫家寶) has called one of the steps which "will certainly bring about complete unification of the motherland [sic]." (See the video below.)

0:35 YouTube video: "DPP ECFA referendum ad - with English titles"
Naturally, the DPP has organized several events ahead of and during Chen Yunlin's arrival. The first of these will be a march and rally in the central Taiwan city of Taichung (台中市) on Sunday, December 20, 2009.

Here's the English-language info from the Taipei Times:

The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) demonstration against the government's China-leaning economic policies [Maddog note: ... and Chinese plans to annex Taiwan!] will be held on Sunday in Taichung starting at 2:30pm, the party announced yesterday, urging the public to join the protest.

[...]

Protesters will gather at 2:30pm at two locations — the intersection of Mincyuan Road (民權路) and Taichunggang Road (台中港路) and the corner of Chaoma Road (朝馬路) and Anhe Road (安和路).

The processions are expected to meet up at 5pm on Hueiwun Road (惠文路), where a rally will be held in an empty parking lot, the spokesman said.

"Everyone should come and join the protests to send a loud and clear message to President Ma Ying-jeou [馬英九] and Chen that all cross-strait issues must be conducted in an open and transparent manner. Taiwan's sovereignty must not be undermined," Chuang said, asking that protesters exercise restraint and avoid violence.

DPP Lawmaker Lee Chun-yee (李俊毅) said that if the government continues to ignore public opinion, protesters could head to the Presidential Office in Taipei next.

Chuang said the DPP would also arrange smaller activities throughout the duration of the meeting from Dec. 21 to Dec. 25. Details will be finalized today by the Central Standing Committee, he said.

Other groups such as Falun Gong practitioners and human right advocates have said they will join the protests.

Meanwhile, according to a survey conducted by the Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU), more than half of the population believes signing an economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) with Beijing will hurt Taiwan's economy and livelihood.

Here's a Google Map I made of the routes and rally location:

View December 20, 2009 protest against Chen Yunlin in a larger map
Here's the Chinese-language info from the Liberty Times (自由時報) [English translations mine]:

第四次江陳會將在台中市舉行，民進黨昨表明，二十日舉辦的「破黑箱．顧飯碗」大遊行，將號召至少十萬人上街，由黨主席蔡英文領軍，邀呂蘇游謝、台聯黨主席黃昆輝等人一起參與，二十一日至二十五日也規劃系列小型活動表達抗議。

Ahead of the fourth Chiang-Chen meeting to be held in Taichung, yesterday [Monday, Dec. 14] the DPP announced a "Breaking the Black Box, Protecting the Rice Bowl" march led by party chairwoman Tsai Ing-wen to take place on the 20th and called for at least 100,000 people to take to the streets. Those invited to attend include [former Vice-President Annette] Lu, Su [Tseng-chang], Yu [Shyi-kun], [Frank] Hsieh, Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU) chairman Huang Kun-huei, and others. A series of smaller protests is scheduled from the 21st to the 25th.

If it's at all possible, you should be there, too! In my opinion, 100,000 is far too small a number for a protest such as this.

* While it's quite a serious matter, DPP protests and rallies are usually happy affairs.

The latest dance moves: Taiwan, 台灣, 曹長青, protest, 抗議, Chen Yunlin, 陳雲林, Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, 經濟合作架構協議, ECFA

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!

A quick analysis of Taiwan's 3-in-1 election

2009-12-06T22:11:00.006+08:00

DPP makes gains, but they aren't enough

Today's Taipei Times had a good visual analysis of the election result in PDF form [link updated] comparing the results with the turnout of the last Township/City/County election in 2005 and showing that out of the locales that were involved (Kaohsiung, Tainan, Taichung, and Taipei [Cities and Counties]) weren't), the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) held onto all their seats plus gained Yilan County. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), on the other hand lost not only Yilan (to the DPP) but Hualien County, too, to Fu Kun-chi (傅昆萁), who had left the party to run against the KMT's Du Li-hua (杜麗華).

The election in Penghu County was close, with KMT candidate Wang Chien-fa (王乾發) beating his DPP opponent Tsai Chien-hsing (蔡見興) by just 595 votes. A recount will take place automatically.

Michael Turton notes how close the overall vote count was, though I should point out that he's only looking at the numbers for the city mayors and county magistrates.

Much more info on the election is available on today's front page and in the Taiwan News section.

Chinese KMT violence to the fore
In other election-related news, Chen Chen-hui (陳振輝), the KMT's losing candidate in the Yunlin County town of Huwei (虎尾鎮) did something incredibly stupid.

A couple of hours after votes had been counted, Chen showed up at rival Lin Wen-pin's (林文彬, DPP) campaign headquarters. Chen was drunk and had a gun, and he started shooting. The DPP candidate's son, a policeman, happened to be on the scene and quickly captured the shooter, but not before a woman had been shot in the leg. Her injuries are said not to be life-threatening.

Here's a Liberty Times (自由時報) report on the shooting from late last night, and another article in today's Liberty Times mentions that Chen has a serious criminal record for having shot two investigators 24 years ago. That article tells us:

根據警方資料，陳振輝在二十四年前曾因槍擊兩名雲林縣調查員入獄。

[Maddog translation:]
According to police sources, Chen Chen-hui was sent to prison 24 years ago for shooting two Yunlin County investigators.

Chinese KMT chairman Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), who happens to be Taiwan's current President, said he'd run a "clean" campaign with "clean" candidates, yet this violent criminal -- who probably had the gun already -- was one of his picks.

Ah, the things that some people will call "clean."

Here's a report on the shooting from SETN (三立新聞台) that I uploaded to YouTube:

2:27 YouTube video: "Shooting in Huwei, Yunlin by loser Chinese KMT candidate"
Is anybody surprised?

UPDATE: More analyses:
* Michael Turton compares the DPP's numbers from the 2008 presidential election with those from the December 5 election. The result shows an increase in DPP support in every area but one (Chiayi City, -1.9%).

* The Monday, December 7, 2009 edition of the Taipei Times takes a magnifying glass to the local election results, showing that the DPP made were bigger than they may seem at first glance. [/update]

Bullets in the chamber: Taiwan, 台灣, election, 選舉, Chinese Nationalist Party, 中國國民黨, Kuomintang, KMT, 國民黨, Chen Chen-hui, 陳振輝, shooting, 槍擊案, Democratic Progressive Party, 民主進步黨, DPP, 民進黨

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!

Bob Yang vs. Bonnie Glaser on Riz Khan

2009-11-20T21:48:00.002+08:00

Obama's cross-strait conundrum

Formosan Association for Public Affairs (FAPA) president Dr. Bob Yang (advocating for an independent Taiwan) and Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) Freeman Chair in China Studies senior fellow and US government consultant Bonnie Glaser (read Michael Turton's eloquent description of her position) sat down with Al Jazeera's Riz Khan on November 17, 2009 to discuss recent events affecting the Taiwan-US-China relationship.

Here's the show in two parts. Watch it in a larger viewer by clicking the titles below each video.

13:01 YouTube video: "Riz Khan - Obama's cross-straits conundrum - 17 Nov 09 - Pt 1"

9:29 YouTube video: "Riz Khan - Obama's cross-straits conundrum - 17 Nov 09 - Pt 2"
At the end, Glaser talks about the majority supporting "the status quo," muddying the waters for those who don't realize that Taiwan is not now and has never been part of the People's Republic of China (PRC), but it is nice to at least hear her admit that without China's threats, the vast majority of Taiwanese would have no qualms about declaring independence.

Pieces of the puzzle: Taiwan, 台灣, Bonnie Glaser, 葛來儀, Bob Yang, 楊英育, Riz Khan, 康立茲

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!

Fifth open letter on the erosion of justice in Taiwan

2009-11-13T01:23:00.002+08:00

The list of signatories grows by almost 20%

Writer Jerome F. Keating, Ph.D. and thirty other scholars and writers from the US, Canada, Asia, Europe and Australia have penned a fifth open letter about the serious problems occurring under the administration of President Ma Ying-jeou.

The letter reminds us that "a decrease of tension across the Taiwan Strait would indeed be welcome, but [...] that this should not be done at the expense of the hard-won democracy" and that "Taiwan should be more fully accepted by the international community as a full and equal partner." Read the full letter at the link above, but here is a large excerpt [emphasis mine]:

During the past two decades, Taiwan has made major progress in each of these areas [freedom, democracy, justice and human rights]. It thus has been a disappointment for us to see an erosion of justice, a weakening of checks and balances in the democratic system and a decline in press freedom in Taiwan. These trends are reflected in the significantly downward ratings Taiwan received in the annual reports of international organizations such as Freedom House and Reporters without Borders.

They are also reflected in the expressions of concern by international scholars and friends of Taiwan related to the flaws in the judicial proceedings against former President Chen Shui-bian and the apparent lack of neutrality in the continuing "investigations" and indictments of other prominent members of the DPP government. We thus appeal to you again to ensure that measures are taken to ensure the impartiality and fairness of the judiciary.

Good governance, accountability and transparency based on the fundamental principles of freedom, democracy, justice and human rights are all the more essential now that your government is moving Taiwan on a path of closer economic ties with China. We believe that a decrease of tension across the Taiwan Strait would indeed be welcome, but emphasize that this should not be done at the expense of the hard-won democracy and the establishment of human rights in Taiwan itself.

Thus, the process of improving relations with the large neighbor across the Strait needs to be an open, deliberative and democratic process, in full consultation with both the Legislative Yuan and the democratic opposition, and fully transparent to the general public. We are thus pleased to hear that officials of your government have stated that any agreement with China would need to have both a domestic consensus, including approval by the Legislative Yuan, and acceptance by the international community. We trust this process will be open and consultative in ways that respect the democratic traditions begun so promisingly two decades ago.

The prequels
Don't forget the earlier parts of this long-running series, listed here in chronological order:

* November 6, 2008: Scholars and writers from around the world publish an "Open letter on erosion of justice in Taiwan." The same letter -- as an online petition -- has been signed by more than 2,000 people.

* November 25, 2008: Minister of Justice Wang Ching-feng (王清峰) calls the open letter "inaccurate."

* December 2, 2008: "Eroding justice: Open letter No. 2" counters Wang Ching-feng's claims.

* January 8, 2009: Over a month later, Wang Ching-feng comes up with "clarif[ications]" regarding the open-letter writers' so-called "misunderstandings."

* January 21, 2009: "Eroding justice: Open letter No. 3" is addressed to President Ma Ying-jeou.

* January 24, 2009: Two more "US-based Taiwan experts add [their] names to open letter [No. 3]."

* January 25, 2009: President Ma claims the public had gained confidence in the judiciary in 2008 -- the exact opposite of what this Taiwan News article tells us they actually felt:
According to recent surveys conducted by Academia Sinica and the Web site Yahoo! Kimo, over 50 percent of the people do not believe in Taiwan's judicial system and over 75 percent have no confidence that the Judicial Yuan will undertake judicial reform [...]
* May 22, 2009: An estimable group of scholars and writers -- 26 in all, and each one with a deep understanding of Taiwan and the surrounding facts -- has composed an open letter addressed directly to President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九). The letter addresses the ever-increasing problems with judicial fairness, press freedom, the lack of transparency in the Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) rapprochement with China, the loss of Taiwan's sovereignty, and the loss of human rights. The argument the letter makes is rock solid. It is based on demonstrable facts.

John Hancocks: Taiwan, 台灣, Ma Ying-jeou, 馬英九, open letter, 公開信, Jerome Keating, 祁夫潤, human rights, 人權, sovereignty, 主權

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!

Support for Taiwan's immediate independence increases by more than 25%

2009-10-20T23:19:00.008+08:00

... in just five months!

UPDATE 2a: The title and subheadline of this post [originally: "Support for Taiwan's immediate independence nearly triples ...in just six months!" -- based on a comparison with the MAC survey quoted below] has been changed to reflect a better comparison with a survey done by the same pollster the month after the MAC poll. Details from that poll and a link to the original are included below in "Update 2b." [/update 2a]

An article from Now News shows that a poll released today by the deep-blue Global Views Magazine (遠見雜誌) has some very interesting numbers related to the desire for Taiwan's formal independence:

民調顯示，19.0%民眾贊成台灣應該儘快獨立、10.3%認應先維持現狀再獨立（急獨與緩獨合計29.3%），40.7%先維持現狀再看情形、 11.0%永遠維持現狀（維持現狀合計為51.7%），4.3%先維持現狀再和大陸統一、4.0%台灣應該儘快和大陸統一（緩統與急統合計為8.3%），與馬總統執政以後，民眾贊成統一的比率並無變動。

[Tim Maddog translation:]
The survey says that 19.0% support independence as soon as possible. 10.3% want to preserve the status quo for now but declare independence later. (Supporters of immediate independence and delayed independence amount to 29.3%.) 40.7% want to preserve the status quo and decide later, while 11% want to preserve the status quo indefinitely (totaling 51.7% in favor of preserving the status quo [sic]). 4.3% want to preserve the status quo but unify with the mainland [sic] later. 4.0% of Taiwanese want to unify with the mainland [sic] as soon as possible. (Those in favor of unification add up to 8.3%.) After President Ma took office, there has been no change in support for unification.

UPDATE 1: Here's a direct link to the latest Global Views survey [464 KB PDF file]. [/update 1]

UPDATE 3: Here's the English version of the Global Views survey [152 KB PDF file]. [/update 3]

Just six month's ago, Taiwan's so-called Mainland Affairs Council (大陸委員會) did a survey which said that "6.7%" supported independence as soon as possible [12 KB PDF file].

A Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) survey from April 17 to 20, 2009
in which only 8.8% state a desire for Taiwan's unification with China.
UPDATE 2b: A May 13 - 15, 2009 survey from Global Views [744 KB PDF file] says:

[...] 15.0%贊成儘速獨立 [...]

[Tim Maddog translation:]
[...] 15% support immediate independence [...]

The current figure of 19% support for immediate independence would therefore amount to an increase of 26.66% (a four percentage point increase from the earlier 15%). The total support for unification in the May 2009 poll amounted to 8.3% -- precisely the same as the most recent poll. [/update 2b]

China's Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) -- chairman of the Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait -- is coming to Taiwan for talks (and possibly to sign agreements) with Straits [sic] Exchange Foundation (海峽交流基金會) chairman and Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) vice-chairman Chiang Pin-kung (江丙坤) this December. Will you be out there protesting?

You are not in the minority. You'd better let the world hear your voices!

Nodes: Taiwan, 台灣, China, 中國, Taiwan Independence, 台灣獨立, survey, 民調, Chiang Pin-kung, 江丙坤, P.K. Chiang, Chen Yunlin, 陳雲林

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!

See the Rebiya Kadeer documentary "10 Conditions of Love"

2009-09-30T04:40:00.003+08:00

Nationwide showings across Taiwan Thursday, October 1, 2009

Think of it as a big middle finger to our belligerent neighbor across the Strait on their birthday, and get your asses out to see the documentary "The 10 Conditions of Love" (愛的十個條件), about the life of World Uyghur Congress leader Rebiya Kadeer (رابىيه قادىر, 熱比婭).

From an e-mail I received, here's the info about the showings with Google map links and my translations added.

熱比婭紀錄片「愛的十個條件」：
十月一日北中南19:00同步播放：

Rebiya Kadeer documentary "10 Conditions of Love":
October 1, playing simultaneously at 7:00 PM in northern, central, and southern Taiwan

台北大安森林公園
Taipei Da-an Forest Park

台中放送局
Taichung Fun Sound Station (AKA Taichung Broadcast Station, "Old Radio Station")

高雄中央公園
Kaohsiung Central Park

屏東縣立文化中心
Pingtung County Cultural Center

台南神學院頌音堂
Tainan Theological College & Seminary

請大家告訴大家！
Tell everyone you know!

See for yourself someone only the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and CCP try to paint as a "terrorist."

Coordinates: Taiwan, 台灣, Rebiya Kadeer, 熱比婭, movie, 電影

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!

Bloomberg blows Ma Ying-jeou's ratings up like a balloon

2009-09-09T22:33:00.002+08:00

Er, "inflates"

A September 8 Bloomberg piece by Tim Culpan and Janet Ong contains a huge "error" which serves Taiwan's current president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九):

Approval Rating

Ma’s approval dropped to a record low of 29 percent after the typhoon claimed so many lives, according to an Aug. 18 survey of 919 adults conducted by the United Daily News. The poll had a margin of error of 3.29 percentage points. About 46 percent of respondents didn’t have confidence in his administration’s relief and rebuilding efforts in the aftermath of the storm.

Bloomberg's number increases Ma's actual rating by almost 45 percent (13 percentage points). As I wrote on August 20 [highlighting added this time around]:

A survey released by pro-blue, 100% Chinese-funded TVBS says that Taiwan President Ma Ying-jeou's (馬英九) approval rating is now at 16 percent [212 kb Hanzi PDF file] following his inept and deadly response to Typhoon Morakot which began battering Taiwan on August 7, 2009, leaving a village with approximately 500 people buried in a gargantuan mudslide, thousands stranded -- some for over a week -- and tens of thousands inundated by deep flooding.

When TVBS says their own guy is doing this bad, he's doing much worse.(Click to enlarge)

I sent an e-mail with the above information to both Culpan and Ong last night just to be sure that these Taiwan-based reporters hadn't somehow overlooked the huge news about Ma's 16 percent approval rating. Yet approximately 24 hours later, there hasn't been any sort of reply, so I think that it's safe to say at this point that they either published this "error" on purpose or simply don't care about the facts.

As of 9:50 PM September 9, a figure which was off by almost 45% (and which was already pointed out to the authors) remained in this Bloomberg article.
(Click to enlarge)
When it comes to Ma Ying-jeou, can you believe Bloomberg?

Polygraphics: Taiwan, 台灣, Bloomberg, 彭博新聞社, Tim Culpan, Janet Ong

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!

The President and the Premier

2009-08-23T07:20:00.001+08:00

... or a couple of scaredy-cats?

An image from today's Liberty Times (自由時報):

President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) (left) and Premier Liu Chao-shiuan (劉兆玄) (middle) appear to be holding hands yesterday as they attend a ceremony for the people who died in Typhoon Morakot two weeks ago.
Photo by 黃佳琳 from the Liberty Times (自由時報)
(Click image to see the original article.)
NOTE: This has nothing to do with frequently-heard hints that Ma is gay, and I wouldn't insult gays by suggesting that either Ma or Liu are part of that community. This is about a president who tried just last Tuesday to give international media the impression that he and his cabinet are "strong leaders." Hint to Ma and Liu: You're doin' it all wrong.

Unhealthy relationships: Taiwan, 台灣, Ma Ying-jeou, 馬英九, Liu Chao-shiuan, 劉兆玄

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!

Ma Ying-jeou: Worst. President. Ever.

2009-08-20T23:16:00.006+08:00

When pro-Ma media says so, it's even worse than that!

Rotten to the core
爛到極點
(Click to enlarge)
A survey released by pro-blue, 100% Chinese-funded TVBS says that Taiwan President Ma Ying-jeou's (馬英九) approval rating is now at 16 percent [212 kb Hanzi PDF file] following his inept and deadly response to Typhoon Morakot which began battering Taiwan on August 7, 2009, leaving a village with approximately 500 people buried in a gargantuan mudslide, thousands stranded -- some for over a week -- and tens of thousands inundated by deep flooding.

When TVBS says their own guy is doing this bad, he's doing much worse.
(Click to enlarge)
Ma took office less than 15 months ago promising "no unification, no independence, and no war" (不統、不獨、不武), but later said that the first of those actually meant that he "had not ruled out unification" [read: annexation]. ~~Only about 10 percent~~ Less than 9 percent of Taiwan's population support unification in any form whatsoever -- whether immediately or at some time in the future (1.2 percent wanting "'unification' ASAP," 7.6 percent wanting "status quo now, 'unification' later," for a total of 8.8 percent).

The Ma administration has also run roughshod over human rights. Last November (2008), over 7,000 police were ostensibly brought out to "protect" visiting Chinese envoy Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait Chairman Chen Yunlin (陳雲林), but instead of merely doing that, hundreds of protesters -- most of whom were peaceful -- were brutally beaten.

That same month, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) (DPP) was detained on charges which have yet to be judged in a fair court according to the evidence. A judge (Chou Chan-chun [周占春]) who ruled that Chen could be released until such judgment was made was replaced with a different judge (Tsai Shou-hsun [蔡守訓]) who toed the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) line. Chen has now unjustly been in detention for over nine months. [If you haven't done so aleady, please go sign the petition to release Chen right now.]

Ma Ying-jeou doesn't care about Taiwan's Aboriginals
Remember in December 2007 when Ma told Aboriginals living in Taipei that he "sees [them] as humans" (我把你當人看)? [at the 7:25 mark in the video]. Then, when around 500 Aboriginals may have died in the mudslide which buried Siaolin Village (小林村), he blamed the victims for not evacuating. (Important point: The evacuation centers for that area were also buried by the mudslides.)

Where is the compassion? This cold-blooded administration has absolutely none. You must open your eyes, see clearly what's happening, and tell the world all about it. Above all, you must never forget how many Taiwanese have died (and continue to do so) because of the KMT.

FURTHER READING:
* While discussing Ma's actions during "the most crucial hours of Morakot," Taiwan Echo points out how everything Ma touches has ended up "a disaster." I recently dubbed this phenomenon "The 馬的斯 Touch®."

* Claudia Jean explains how the DPP tried long ago to do what the KMT is now trying to take credit for (and which the KMT repeatedly blocked, thus postponing vital action until hundreds of people were already dead).

* Michael Turton points out that "When [the pro-blue] UDN says a KMT administration is not popular -- it ain't popular."

* Over at Talk Taiwan, Άλισον wishes that Larry King would interview Ma Ying-jeou. On that show, a whole new audience would get to see Ma's incompetent and dangerous foolishness.

* Today's Taipei Times has an English-language analysis of the TVBS survey: MORAKOT: THE AFTERMATH: Ma, Liu approval ratings plummet in Morakot's wake

UPDATE: Here are some images showing the numbers from even more recent surveys.

A chart shows Ma Ying-jeou and Liu Chao-shiuan's (劉兆玄) "satisfaction" ratings.
Satisfied (L) vs. dissatisfied (R)
(Click to enlarge)

Here's a comparison of various surveys asking if Ma should step down (those below the black line).
Should step down (L) vs. shouldn't (R)
It should be noted that neither CNN nor ICRT could be considered "green."
(Click to enlarge)

Talking Show had a call-in survey about whether Ma should step down.
The final vote was: YES: 125,709 (98.214%); NO: 2,286 (1.786%)
(Click to enlarge)
[/update]

Scapegoats: Taiwan, 台灣, Typhoon Morakot, 莫拉克颱風, August 8, 2009 floods, 八八水災, Taiwanese Aboriginals, 台灣原住民, Ma Ying-jeou, 馬英九, TVBS, surveys, 民調

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!

CNN can't decide whether to call Ma Ying-jeou Taiwan's "president" or its "leader"

2009-08-17T22:11:00.002+08:00

They distort, you decide

Here are three screenshots which tell a story:

4:03 AM, August 17, 2009, Taiwan time
The most-viewed article at that time was listed as "Taiwan leader takes typhoon blame"
(and it's good to see that the readers are paying attention to Taiwan!),
but clicking that link took me to what you'll see in the next image.
(Click image to enlarge)

4:04 AM, August 17, 2009, Taiwan time
"Taiwan's president takes blame for typhoon response,"
but somebody behind the scenes is about to take the blame for the headline.
(Not that the link above appeared on the same page with this headline.)
Take a look below to see what happened next.
(Click image to enlarge)

8:30 AM, August 17, 2009, Taiwan time
Now it says "Taiwan's leader takes blame for typhoon response,"
and the first sentence of the article also uses the word "leader."
(Click image to enlarge)
Note the URL of the page calls Ma "president," but the most recent version changes "president" (in both the headline and the body of the article) to "leader," only using the word "president" in a direct quote from Ma farther down the page:

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/08/16/taiwan.president.typhoon/index.html

Gee, how do you think that happened?

FURTHER READING:
* Luby in Wonderland: "CNN: Ma takes full responsibility, will punish subordinates, but will not resign"

* A post I wrote November 2006 shows how Ma "takes responsibility."

Square pegs: Taiwan, 台灣, media, 媒體, CNN, 有線電視新聞網

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!

Impressions of Typhoon Morakot

2009-08-14T17:14:00.003+08:00

Ma Ying-jeou's "Katrina"

Typhoon Morakot (莫拉克颱風) did extensive damage to large areas of Taiwan over the past weekend. Here in Taichung, it rained heavily from about Thursday night (August 6) until Tuesday afternoon (August 11).

Southern Taiwan experienced over 2,500 mm of rain from the storm resulting in widespread flooding and landslides which trapped thousands of residents of Chiayi, Tainan, Kaohsiung, Pingtung, and Taitung Counties. Several barrier lakes were also formed by landslides, creating the potential for even more devastation.

CNN's Guillermo Arduino gives details about Typhoon Morakot
(screenshot from the video linked above)
(Click to enlarge)
~~As of Tuesday night, at least 62 people were confirmed dead~~ As of 10 PM Thursday night (August 13), at least 116 people were confirmed dead (that number has probably risen since I found that report), and the death toll will inevitably rise for many days to come. UPDATE: "As of Saturday [August 29, 2009], confirmed fatalities from Morakot had reached 571, with 106 others listed as missing, the Central Emergency Operation Center said." [/update]

The response (or lack thereof) and who's to blame
In the 921 Earthquake of September 21, 1999 which happened under the watch of President Lee Teng-hui (李登輝), the first troops from the south (工兵) were dispatched within two hours to begin clearing roads, and within a day, 15,362 troops were dispatched during this crucial time period to assist with rescue efforts such as extracting survivors from collapsed buildings. Last Friday, people in Linbian Township (林邊鄉), Pingtung County (areas easily accessible to those with proper equipment -- boats, jet skis, etc.) who had called for help early in the morning were still waiting for that help to arrive 16 or 17 hours later.

Under former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), emergency management had been improved to the point where, according to the Taiwan News, "emergency pumping equipment and other supplies or military manpower could be dispatched 10 minutes instead of hours after a [Central Operation Center] command." But after a little more than one year under President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), the power to make such decisions was rescinded by the central government. Yet Ma tried to shift the blame to local officials, especially DPP ones, for delaying the help.

Ma Ying-jeou hates Taiwanese people
But Ma went much further, even blaming the victims, just like the Bush administration and their supporters did following Hurricane Katrina:

1:56 YouTube video: "【莫拉克颱風】CNN專訪是否防颱不周馬英九卸責：都是災民不走不撤離"
Translation: [Typhoon Morakot] CNN: Should Taiwan not have been more prepared?
Ma: It's all because the victims stayed where they were.
Defying common sense, Ma not only refused to declare a state of emergency -- he also refused assistance offered by Japan and the US (before doing an about-face while still trying to compile a "wish list" of what is needed).

In the meantime, rescue helicopters repeatedly passed over areas where people required help and continued focusing on the areas getting the most media coverage. The inevitable result was clashes between family members of the groups in these areas. Why didn't Ma use all the resources at his disposal and get the sick, the injured, the elderly, and those who need medication out of every area possible at the same time? Why was only one helicopter dispatched anywhere in Taiwan on the first day when so many bridges were out? (If the weather allowed one to go up, others could have gone up as well.) And why did it take until August 12 to get the big (tandem-rotor) helicopters (like the Chinook CH-47) out? The president is the one who must give these kinds of orders to the military. People will naturally come to the conclusion that most of this was the result of very ugly politics.

Chinese Nationalist Party-led (KMT) Taipei City was somehow allowed to round up 6,000 soldiers just to set up for the upcoming Deaflympics, but only 8,000 were assigned to national disaster relief in the days immediately following Morakot.

The media
While CNN was appropriately saying on Thursday, August 6 that Morakot may very well turn into a "super typhoon," Taiwan's Central Weather Bureau (CWB) was -- as late as Thursday -- "warn[ing] residents in the north and northeast [Maddog note: "especially the north and northeast," as opposed to the south, which took the brunt of the storm] that the storm was packing powerful winds and torrential rain."

On one hand, ETTV (very pro-blue) actually provided some help to people who called in. But at the same time, they were licking Ma's boots by repeatedly saying how well the government was performing and how fast they came to people's help. That's some heavy-duty spin at the very least.

On Tuesday, while TVBS was operating a phone bank to collect donations for the victims of the storm, Ma -- who (as then-president-elect) along with his wife staffed the phones sought donations for the victims of last year's Sichuan Earthquake in China -- was busy shifting the blame for the storm's devastating aftermath onto the CWB and DPP leaders. (While the CWB may have gotten it wrong, Ma -- you know, the president -- was twiddling his thumbs.)

A Yahoo poll conducted on August 10 and 11 asked 12,016 people their opinions about the Ma government's handling of this disaster. Only 4% (485 respondents) were "very satisfied." Another 10.4% (1,247 respondents) were "somewhat satisfied," bringing the "satisfied" total to 14.4% (1,732 respondents). 13.3% (1,597 respondents) were in the "not very satisfied" category while another 72.3% (8,687 respondents) said they were "very unsatisfied." That gives a total of 85.6% (10,284 respondents) who were "unsatisfied."

The aloofness
In Taimali, Taitung, Ma was met by a distraught man whose father had been washed away by floods there. What he told the man may shock you, but if you've been paying attention, it would be exactly what you should expect Ma to say.

Ma told the man, "I lost my father, too, so I know exactly how you feel." ("你的心情我完全了解 … 我父親也過世了我非常了解這個感覺") (Listen closely from 0:53 - 1:01)

That should be all you need to know about Ma's ability to lead a country. "苦民所苦" ("I feel the people's pain"), my ass!

The resolution
This catastrophe is far from over. The Houfeng Bridge over the Dajia River -- a section of which collapsed in September 2008 during Typhoon Sinlaku, killing six people -- has still not been reopened to traffic, and at least 20 bridges are out after Morakot.

In addition, mountain roads, hotels, and many many homes (some along with their residents) have disappeared. Of the things that can be fixed, how long will it take, and at what cost?

Will this wake enough Taiwanese up? Or will they keep putting people like Ma in positions with far more power than people like himself can handle?

FURTHER INFO:
* Taiwan Floods on Twitter

* Taiwan Floods web site: 莫拉克災情網路中心

* In English for those who want to volunteer: DPP Typhoon Morakot Disaster Operations Center

* A blog set up by the DPP before Typhoon Morakot was even gone: 【莫拉克水災】南台灣救援行動網路支援中心

* DisasterTW.com (莫拉克颱風災情支援網)

* Dr. Billy Pan recruited help from other Taiwan Netizens to create a Google map detailing the disaster areas

* Claudia Jean kicks Ma Ying-jeou's ass for his and his administration's unconscionable behavior regarding this typhoon.

* Taipei Times, August 12, 2009: "EDITORIAL: A president far from his people"

* Taipei Times, August 13, 2009: MORAKOT: THE AFTERMATH: Rescue workers, mudslide survivors share shock, grief

* Taipei Times, August 13, 2009: MORAKOT: THE AFTERMATH: Ma media comments anger disaster zone survivors

* New York Times, August 13, 2009: Taiwan President Is Target of Anger After Typhoon

* Mon homme F. Varga says it's "Time To Ask Questions After Morakot," and he lists some key ones that the media and public should be asking.

* The blog of Taipei City Councilor Chien Yu-yen (簡余晏) (DPP) has documents from the Ministry of National Defense which reveal how slowly and inefficiently President Ma used the resources at his disposal.

* As early as August 5, scientists at NASA saw "a monster in Morakot"

* YouTube video: See how Morakot also covered villages in the Philippines with water and mud.

* According to Chinese state media CCTV on August 7, an orange alert -- the second highest level alert -- was issued in China for the storm

* Some death-defying (nearly whacked by a flying sign) raw footage shot in Hualien by TyphoonHunter (James Reynolds) as the storm made landfall

* A video I posted last year after Typhoon Kalmaegi: "Don't put your lives in the hands of the KMT"

* A playlist of the Monday August 10, 2009 edition of Talking Show (大話新聞)

(Άλισον and Claudia Jean contributed to this post.)

Unused resources: Taiwan, 台灣, Typhoon Morakot, 莫拉克颱風, August 8, 2009 floods, 八八水災, Ma Ying-jeou, 馬英九

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!

Returning to dictatorship under the KMT

2009-07-20T22:54:00.000+08:00

Destruction of democracy

Taiwan Democracy Memorial Hall (臺灣民主紀念館)
Photographed in December 2007 by Tim Maddog
(Click to enlarge)
Earlier today, the dictator-loving Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government under Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) removed a sign reading "臺灣民主紀念館" ("Taiwan Democracy Memorial Hall") from a Taipei monument and restored its earlier name "中正紀念堂" ("Chiang Kai-shek [蔣介石/蔣中正] Memorial Hall") in commemoration of a dictator who was responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of Taiwanese here and millions of people in China.

Remember how Ma said he would "gauge public opinion" before changing the name and that it was "not a pressing matter"? Did you believe it then?

A closer shot of the plaque which -- until earlier
today -- read "Taiwan Democracy Memorial Hall"
Photographed in December 2007 by Tim Maddog
(Click to enlarge)
This is yet another brazen display of the KMT's authoritarian nature, their unabashed love of dictators, and their hatred of democracy.

Are you awake yet? If you are, and if anyone you know is still asleep, go pour a large bucket of cold water on their heads this instant!

FURTHER READING:
* Michael Turton pretty much live-blogged it: KMT restores Chiang Kai-shek Name to Memorial Hall

* See what I wrote about this on May 30, 2009: The Chinese Nationalist Party hates Taiwan's democracy

Things to remember and never forget: Taiwan, 台灣, Ma Ying-jeou, 馬英九, Chinese Nationalist Party, 中國國民黨, Kuomintang, KMT, 國民黨, Taiwan Democracy Memorial Hall, 臺灣民主紀念館, Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall, 中正紀念堂, Chiang Kai-shek, 蔣介石, CKS, 蔣中正

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!

Formosa Betrayed -- the official movie preview

2009-07-19T06:01:00.000+08:00

The reason transitional justice is so important in Taiwan

The official trailer for the long-awaited film "Formosa Betrayed" is out. The film is based on the real-life murder of a Taiwanese writer which was carried out on American soil, and it follows the trail of evidence right to the top levels of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government:

1:44 YouTube video: "FORMOSA BETRAYED - [OFFICIAL TRAILER]"
My favorite lines from the trailer: "The Chinese say we are their brothers. But if we are brothers, why do they treat us like this?"

I don't know the official release date yet, but if this film is showing anywhere within 20,037.51 kilometers of your location, you must see it. Open your eyes.

FURTHER RESOURCES:
* The official movie web site

* The story and the history behind it via the official web site

* The film's news page mentions some festivals where the film has been accepted and will probably be the place to find out the actual release date.

* Formosa Betrayed on IMDb.com

Cast of characters: Taiwan, 台灣, transitional justice, 轉型正義, Formosa Betrayed

Cross-posted at Taiwan Matters!