By Farish A. Noor
While the simplistic thesis put forward by Samuel Huntington in his work ‘The Clash of Civilisations’ reads like a paltry script from a bad movie, it has to be said that bad scripts are often the most believable and effective. It was Huntington who predicted that in the wake of the Cold War a new sort of conflict would arise, namely one configured along cultural-civilisational differences between the developed Western world and the mysterious, exotic and threatening East.
The two cultural blocs that were said to be the future adversaries to the West were the Muslim world and China, respectively. In the case of the former, it was opined by Huntington that with the demise of Communism the potential threat of Islam would be realised sooner or later for the simple reason that Islam and the West shared ‘bloody frontiers’ that were marked by centuries of conflict. This thesis, however, is patently false to anyone who has even the slightest idea of the history of Islam and the non-Muslim world, for the fact is that the frontiers of the Muslim world are not marked by violence nor stained by blood, but rather remain porous horizons marked by the eclectic culture of Islamic mysticism or Sufism: From Southeast Asia to China, from Africa to Europe, the furthest frontiers of the Muslim world are precisely where mysticism and the Muslim practice of inter-cultural dialogue and cultural cross-fertilisation flourished the most.
Related to Huntington’s fear of Islam was his fear of China, dubbed the ‘sleeping giant’ by Napoleon more than a century ago and which till today has yet to truly realise and demonstrate its full economic potential. Huntington’s crude thesis argued that in time the West would have to realise that non-negotiable cultural differences exist between the Western world and the Orient, and that these cultural differences would ultimately serve as the catalyst for an all-out confrontation between the West and China.
As the world stands on the brink of a global recession and as we witness what may soon become a global food and resource crisis, the lens of Western policy-makers and media analysts are already looking eastwards to locate the new ‘threat’ to the global order, namely China.
It is with this thought in mind that we reflect on the rather curious assortment of media tit-bits that have been served to us lately. In a space of a month, the international media has focused on the internal and external developments in China of late. Needless to say, the human rights record of China – not only in its dealings with Tibet but also internally in terms of its treatment of local dissidents – leaves much to be desired. China was and remains an authoritarian state with a brutal policing apparatus that works to ensure that the regime remains in power at all costs, regardless of the loss of basic freedoms and civil liberties to its people.
But having said that, it should also be remembered that the Chinese government is not the only despotic regime on the planet at the moment. Nor should we forget that the Western governments have been willing and able to work with many equally brutal regimes the world over, from the despots of the Arab states to the dictatorships in Latin America and Africa. So why single out China for now? And if China’s record is something to be looked at closely, we might as well take some time out to look at America’s own human rights record in dealing with the detainees in Guantanamo Bay as well.
The latest craze seems to be the focus on China’s economic dealings with Africa and how Chinese companies have been investing in the development of natural resources and infrastructure in the African continent. Several reports in the international media – including the BBC and CNN – have painted the picture of an aggressive China moving into the African continent to suck its resources dry and to secure monopolies in areas such as oil and gas.
Yet it has to be remembered that in the wake of the Second Gulf War and the invasion of Afghanistan in 2002, it was America that took the lead in the race to re-establish its presence in the African continent. Fearful of the prospect that the oil and gas reserves in the Arab-Muslim world were being depleted too fast, and that Arab oil and gas will run out for good in less than two decades, American and other Western oil and gas companies have begun to turn to Africa as another source of vital resources for their industrialised economies. Soon after the invasion of Afghanistan the Washington-based African Oil Policy Initiative Group (AOPIG) was set up to promote American oil and gas company interests in Africa. Already many of these companies have secured for themselves lasting monopolies in African countries like Nigeria.
So is all this talk of an ‘aggressive China’ moving into Africa simply a smokescreen to hide the fact that American oil and gas companies are already there, exploiting the natural resources of Africa to serve their own domestic industrial needs? And if China is to expand and develop its economy, then surely it also needs to secure a steady supply of vital resources such as oil, gas and steel?
This, then, appears to be the real reason and agenda behind the spate of China-bashing that we are seeing in the international media today. For if the governments of the West are really concerned about the standard of human rights in China at present, they would do just as well to apply the same standards to themselves and to their strategic allies in the Arab world, Africa and Asia. For now however, this hypocrisy of the highest level will continue as long as the international community remains blissfully ignorant of the real geo-political manoeuvrings that are taking place in this latest media skirmish between the West and China. A global economic crisis is in the making, as well as a global race for rapidly depleting resources. The media campaign to demonise China today is just the opening round to what will surely be a long-term conflict whose human costs will be borne by the rest of humanity as well.
#1 by blablowbla on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 10:00 pm
yes,no CNN,no CNN,no CNN,no Chinese Negative News!
1.3 billion China population,added-up with the other Asia gigantic 1 billion India population,and the 1 billion Muslims in Asia were to unite,who the hell can bash Asia?
#2 by blablowbla on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 10:05 pm
to show our power,just use one currency,might not necessary be RMP,just create a new ASIAN currency like Euro Dollars,we can bash with Western countries,economically!
#3 by cheng on soo on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 10:30 pm
Why no US bashing, didn’t US invaded Iraq n Afghanistan which are at least 6000 km from US. Are these invasions not = aggression?
#4 by gofortruth on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 10:57 pm
At the beginning of the 20th century, labour force played the key role to economic power & China had aplenty and we saw how the barbaric 8 from the West then tried to swallow up China by brute military force. Thanks to the outbreak of 2nd world war which had sucked up all their military resources in killing each other all over Europe, China was spared.
We have seen how the eventual winner emerged from the 2nd world war, USA has dominated the world arena since through its economic power but is now sensing China & India coming up strongly on the economic front & in time will pose a serious challenge.
Time will tell if the West will continue to rule the world through economic power by taming/ or disrupting the Chinese dragon & Indian tiger. We expect more dirty tricks coming from them. Their blind support for a provincial state of China, Tibet (since the Yuan Dynasty) to go independent is just one ruthless tactic to attempt to rock China’s economy.
#5 by cheng on soo on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 11:43 pm
gofortruth Says:
Today at 22: 57.46 (41 minutes ago)
“2nd world war which had sucked up all their military resources in killing each other all over Europe, {China was spared.}”
Sorry to disagree that “China was spared during 2nd World war, ” Haven’t you hear of Sino-Japanese War 1931 to 1945??
Truth is US mainland was SPARED!
#6 by Open Air on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 12:03 am
.
For those who are uninitiated in the recent Tibetan crisis, it is important to note that the Dalai Lama didn’t support any sort of violence and admitted that he didn’t have any knowledge of the “planned demonstrations” in Tibet. (interviewed while he was in seattle, wash just recently).
If he didn’t instigate the riotous demonstrations in Tibet then who did?
Perhaps Steven Spielberg can answer that since he was so outspoken and passionate about boycotting the Olympic because of the Tibet issue.
( take note : China / Chinese should boycott his movie ).
Perhaps it was the Europe and US having complicit to be supremacist rulers of the world.
Referencing back to the world history you should know who are the real devils in disguise?
.
#7 by cheng on soo on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 12:12 am
The West are the BIGGEST HYPOCRITES,
eg, Can they support Hawaiians for a separate country, or the Red Indians, or the Basque in Spain, or the Welsh & Scots in UK, or the Maoris in NZ, etc
Truth is IF Tibet Autonomous Region get independent, US would put up a military base in Tibet, and control everything in Tibet.
#8 by bra888 on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 12:28 am
http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/4/23/nation/21033327&sec=nation
Malaysia have aerospace industry?
LOL!!!!!!
““Developing research and development means investment,” he said, and pointed out countries, including China, which persisted with their space programme because of the far-reaching benefits.”
I believe China BUILT THEIR OWN SPACESHIP!!!
Is he being trained to be more stupid?
Please stop training him. What we need are rocket scientists and people who can develop a spaceship first before we have a space tourist. I believe that this guy will not even pilot the spaceship, so forget about training him!
#9 by miketan142 on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 12:55 am
The media bashing are the western ploy to get china to toe the line towards the rapidly depleting world resources. Chinese consumption is threatening the west in the race to the limited resources. USA and Europe with only 20% of the world population are consuming 75% of our world resources. They should reduce their wasteful lifestyle, not just recycle.
#10 by citizen86 on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 3:12 am
wasteful lifestyle im on with you there but the tibetian issue i hope it can be resolved more peacefullly god bless all and dont trust cnn that is tee vee three’s big daddy =) im sure u guy
#11 by citizen86 on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 3:12 am
get wat i mean sorry for d type
#12 by Jeffrey on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 4:31 am
It is trait of humans, groups and nations to define and enhance his/their individual/collective interest by competing for and asserting dominance and mastery over others as a necessary condition to get scare and depleting resources. Wars and strife have always been fought over territories and economic resources but the justification is always based on feeling of insecurity of and perception of threat by others different. That perception of ‘difference’ and threat is exacerbated by differences of political or economic ideology.
Up to end of 20th century, the most important distinctions among peoples were ideological, political, or economic (eg capitalist versus communist, open society versus close/totalitarian).
Samuel Huntington in his work ‘The Clash of Civilisations’ adds one more difference becoming important difference in post-Cold War world – cultural. Culture is an amalgam of values, way of life and practices and beliefs. Western values are interconnected in a seamless web by concepts of individualism, liberty of the individual, equality not only between men and men but men and women (hence polygamy is eschewed), tolerance of diversity, constitutional government, the rule of law, democracy, free markets, separation of private morality from public morality, law from morality, government from religion, sovereignty of man make laws rather than divine laws etc. To say that there is no clash between Western values and those of Islam – the central thesis of Huntington – is naïve and factually wrong.
Of course clash of values by itself will not precipitate conflict if there were no underlying economic and underlying geopolitical motivations. That is agreed but to say that clash of values plays no significant part, at least as an exacerbating factor – or excuse if you will – inciting feelings of insecurities and providing a justification for war is, as I already said, naïve and untrue.
This is not one of Farish’s customary impressive articles. He shouldn’t selectively try to debunk Huntington’s thesis by just seizing on one aspect of what Huntington said about Islam and the West sharing ‘bloody frontiers’ that were marked by centuries of conflict, and missing the nuances of the rest Huntington said.
Historically the Moorish expansion up to Spain AD 711 multiple crusades, Holy wars of Saladin and his adversary Richard the Lionheart, Charlemagne etc were concerning bloody frontiers though not so much today.
Today when 19 Osama’s suicide biombers flew the Boeing jets like missiles into the World Trade Centre & Pentagon, it had nothing to do with passions stirred by bloody frontiers but differences of culture as Huntington said.
#13 by Jeffrey on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 5:04 am
Farish is entitled to ask “ why single out China for now? “And if China’s record is something to be looked at closely, we might as well take some time out to look at America’s own human rights record in dealing with the detainees in Guantanamo Bay as well”.
Farish is also right about:
· “Western governments have been willing and able to work with many equally brutal regimes the world over, from the despots of the Arab states to the dictatorships in Latin America and Africa” and hence – hypocrisy on part of western governments and policy makers; and
· Western or more specifically US’s fear of China as a rising political and economic power posing as rival counterweight to the West competing for oil and other economic resources including in Africa.
But he ought not to insinuate that the above is the reason for Western media’s skewed portrayal of China’s handling of Tibet and domestic dissidents. That is wrong.
Yes, western media may not be objective but their lack of objectivity has nothing to do with perception of China as a growing political and economic giant posing a threatening counterweight to Western political and economic hegemony and power.
Such concerns of threat and how to contain China may preoccupy the thinking and recommendations of thinkers, analysts and policy makers of Pentagon and other Western defence establishments – but not the Western media barons and executives of CNN, CNBC, New York Times, Washington Post or BBC!
If the latter western media barons and executives were bias and skewed in portrayal of China’s handling of Tibetan and domestic dissidents, it is again due to relevance of Huntington’s point of a clash of Western values (extolling freedom of expression and civil protest by peaceful demonstration) as against China’s existing position as a communist state not tolerating it.
Again, Farish has failed to incisively contradict Huntington’s point on Clash of Civilisation.
Farish is a scholar and should undserstand that for a scholar to say anything significant, he has to generalize and should not be discredited by exceptions here and there when the gneral drift is incontrovertible. The true measure of a theory is not that it accounts for all the relevant facts but that it accounts for those facts “better than any other theory.” Without abstraction and simplification – hence generalisation – there can be no understanding…
Farish being caught in conflicting worlds of Western values clashing with his empathy for the Islamic worldview is evincing a measure of disorientation leading to a loss of objectivity of analysis, if I may respectfully suggest so.
#14 by lopez on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 6:40 am
The author should shut her mouth about things china, in fact who can say they know or understand chinese or china, what one read or gather information from someone who claim they know china have to come from some source and ….in the so called western world more precisely western influenced.
Dont interfere with things chinese, it has nothing concerning her.
Dont cross the line, it is the chinese peoples affairs.
#15 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 6:56 am
SIR JEFFREY.
What has( related to Huntingtons’ fear of Islam was his fear of China ). para three of the above by the author.
what has this fear of Islam got to do with China ?
thank you.
#16 by k1980 on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 8:32 am
Question: Why does the West pick on China when there are much worse abuse of human rights elsewhere, such as Haitians unable to afford food, Zimbabweians and Kenyans cheated by vote-rigging, Hutus and Tutsis gleeing chopping up each other, Americans using Iraqis and Afghans for target practice, ect
Answer: So that China could be torn apart by chaos, as is happening in the above countries
#17 by lakilompat on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 8:35 am
what has this fear of Islam got to do with China ?
Fear of Islam – Anti-US threats.
Fear of China – Economic threats & Military threats & Space program threats.
#18 by sotong on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 8:55 am
The US and the West know it is not in the best interest of Asia Pacific and the world if China is unstable.
Like the Middle East countries, China’s authoritarian government does not accept certain things of the West eg. free of speech and expression, right to peaceful demostration and etc..
#19 by lakilompat on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 9:05 am
It will be chaos if:-
Billionth of ppl. at least Millionth of free of speech and expression, right to peaceful demostration. Millionth of “Gays & Lesbian marriage” Millionth of cults & sects “Falun Gon” There’s always a price for every freedom.
#20 by sotong on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 9:19 am
The fear and insecurity to empower the people to fully capitalise on their human resources will see India, the biggest democracy in the world, to rival US and West in a few decades.
#21 by Jeffrey on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 9:43 am
ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH
On your question – “what has this fear of Islam got to do with China ?” – in context of Huntington’s Clash of Civilization – it is a hard question but I’ll try to answer it, as I understand what Huntington’s view is as interpreted by Farish.
After end of bipolar cold war with fragmentation of Soviet Union leaving USA sole remaining superpower, international system of the twenty-first century still has 6 or 7 blocs of major powers — the United States, Europe, China, Japan, Russia, India – and Islamic states whose strategic locations, large populations, and/or oil resources make them influential in world affairs …
Whilst ideological, political, or economic differences had always served as catalyst for world’s conflicts up to end of 20th century, today there is another important dimension not to be forgotten – ie cultural differences. US & strong western nations (eg UK) control global movie, television, and video industries together with multinationals like Coca Cola, KFC, McDonalds export Western culture and values world wide, degree of absorption by these countries varying some more some less.
Those countries absorbing less would have bigger cultural divide with US & the West. It does not mean these countries cannot modernize having less western values and tradition – one example China. So a country like China could become politically economically and militarily strong posing threat to US in all these senses (economic, political influence military threat). These are underlying foundation of mutual insecurity and suspicion, the catalyst factor to precipitate conflict is cultural differences. In case of China cultural differences (communism and totalitarianism against individual liberties), weigh more than common values (like market/capitalist economy seen in certain parts of China in East like Shenzhen, Shanghai, Guangzhou etc). Just like various Islamic states in Middle East (Taliban Afhganistan, Iran Syria etc) have in Islam more cultural differences in terms of values and beliefs than US & West. Though Islamic states not as strong as China, even the Islamists are politically united to fight US/Western interest in Middle East.
So China & Islamic though between themselves are culturally different from one and another, yet in each case, has strong cultural differences with US/West serving as catalyst for conflicts with US/West based on, in China’s case underlying competition for economic, political and military power and in case of Islamic states underlying rejection of US/West for meddling in affairs of Muslims/Islam. [As we learn in Chemistry, catalyst is not the condition for conflict but the agent or factor making that condition happen].
So cultural differences between Islamic States and US and between China and US is common denominator shared by Islamic states/Islam and China leading to Islam and China bashing, so Farish said.
According Farish both China & Islamic states are bashed by USA/Western interest because of this cultural differences.
It depends on what bashing one is talking about. In terms of military bashing only Islamic states of Afghanistan & Iraq (if you call Saddam’s Iraq one) were bashed by Western governments but not so China (so far) in spite of handling or mishandling of Tibetan’s protests. If, by bashing, is meant media bashing and bias, then maybe both Islam and China were presented unfavourably by Western media. However this only validates Huntington’s thesis than discredit or contradict it (as it is Farish’s general attempt to do so). It only shows western journalists are affected by cultural differences in their interpretation of events.
#22 by cheng on soo on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 9:51 am
Soon, say about 9 years from now, when India really show the potential of becoming a superpower, there may be an “India bashing” season by the West!
May be by then, the West may find that “China bashing” could be hurting them (at least economically!)
#23 by undergrad2 on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 10:55 am
ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH Says:
Today at 06: 56.30 (3 hours ago)
“SIR JEFFREY.
What has….”
When did Jeffrey QC get his knighthood from the Queen of England? How come nobody told me???
#24 by Jeffrey on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 11:10 am
Knighthood was conferred by Tun ADAM YONG in the pretty same cavalier way without reference to personal history and references by which the QC was equally arbitraily conferred by you.
#25 by lakilompat on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 11:35 am
It’s just pure business, news ppl would like to buy.
#26 by undergrad2 on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 11:39 am
“What has this fear of Islam got to do with China ?” lakilompat
There are more Muslims in China then there are in Malaysia, and let’s not forget that this century belongs to China. Like it or not the next one hundred years will see the emergence and rise of China as a world economic power accompanied by the long anticipated decline in western civilization.
I may have to move to China.
#27 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 11:42 am
DEAR UNDERGRAD2.
SIR JEFFREY . has considerable maturity in his analysis of any subject matters. His approach and skill in presenting his views or counter any views are done most graciously and diplomatically. Further, he qualifies his statements with provided references and facts. I find him highly intellectual. I do look forward to reading his comments. However, he declined to be my solicitor, and he is one humble gentlemen. It is with respect, that i address him as SIR.
#28 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 11:52 am
Dear undergrad2.
If you move to China, than you must have knowledge of chinese language or mandarin. On this point, i have suggested that bloglimkitsiang have bahasa malaysia column too. i am sure lakilompat read my notes yesterday.
Seriously . YB LIM, the 13 th gereral election should be in DAP planning now. and unless you can spread this alternative media or blog to the malays, whom are the majority in the country, DAP is still perceived as chinese party. i can be a volunteer.
apology to miss moderator. habits die hard. always get distracted from the main agenda.
#29 by lakilompat on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 12:04 pm
Dear undergrad2,
There are certain province within China, living standard is many times higher than Malaysia and any part of the world, Shanghai and Beijing.
Talking abt. economic power, look at the market within China. If 1 billionth of Chinese spend 20 RenMinBi for donation in 1 day, that’s already RM 10 Billion equivalent to approximately USD 3.2 Billionth
That’s just one day if 1 billionth of the chinese suddenly decided to used 20 renminbi to boycott something.
#30 by sotong on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 12:19 pm
There is a huge gap between the rich and poor…………..China is starting to see the enormous cost of economic development and uneven distribution of wealth and opportunity of the past decades, including her environment.
The fear of social unrest is strong.
#31 by Jeffrey on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 12:44 pm
US & Western concerns about China’s growing importance are understandable. Whether myth or fact, the populations there – just like those of Islamic countries – are growing faster than the white population! They see the Chinese are as hard working and proliferate like tenacious ants…. It is not just the huge Chinese market but also the fact that they use their considerable financial resources and reserves to play the game that western capitalists do : cross border, buy up real estates, banks, form alliances and buy up and stock pile the world’s scarce resources, whether oil, essential minerals, commodities like palm oil etc so much so they would in time to come control world’s prices. This is not to mention they are also relatively technologically advance when they stock pile ground-based medium-range ballistic nuclear missile warheads, launch satellites and rockets…..The tanks may be out-of-date, its modest air force lack modern avionics and naval fleet equivalent to US coastal patrols but China’s 2.8 million-person army is the world’s largest . That’s why in spite of being that well equipped and trained, Russia, sharing common borders, is worried about them swarming over.
#32 by Jeffrey on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 12:46 pm
OOps”….in spite of being NOT that well equipped and trained…”
#33 by undergrad2 on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 12:47 pm
Yes, not to forget that the Chinese government today has massive holdings of U.S. Government treasury bills and if it were to flood the market with them, the pressure on the US dollar is enormous!
#34 by undergrad2 on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 12:52 pm
“Apology to Miss Moderator. Habits die hard. Always get distracted from the main agenda.” ADAM
It is not wise to make a play for the moderator. She might moderate you out from the blog entirely! If that were to happen we’d all miss you!
#35 by undergrad2 on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 12:57 pm
“Talking abt. economic power, look at the market within China. If 1 billionth of Chinese spend 20 RenMinBi for donation in 1 day, that’s already RM 10 Billion equivalent to approximately USD 3.2 Billionth” lakilompat
Yes – and I dare not imagine if every Chinese in Mainland China were to come to the coast facing Taiwan and do what I think they might want to do, the tsunami created would not only flood Taiwan but the west coast of the United States!
#36 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 2:14 pm
YANG BERHORMAT LIM KIT SIANG.
YANG BERUSAHA MODERATOR.
allow me to make proposals and suggestions that YB lim may/ or may not consider.
1. i still suggest that bloglimkitsiang be bilingual, ie english and bahasa malaysia. Dap have to reach the malay electorates, and what better means to do that , than to start it now. are you going to depend on pas and pkr for the malay votes. than the racial line is drawn again.
2. there are many good comments suggested by many , and i propose that the moderator or admistrator, can communicate with the said person, ie under jeffrey, undergrad2, limkamput, hj angus,lakikompat,billgate, directly below their post, the thinking of YB lim. Of course, we cannot expect Yb to answer all. but it makes the blog more interesting, when we see YB views on certain comments.
3.i think the issues of corruptions , judiciary, government bailouts and scandals, abuse of power are matters to hearts of malaysians, which also include the rising inflation tsunami for sure. the views of Yb and the pakatan raayat are of interest to us commoners than the articles of philosophers.
thank you.
#37 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 2:25 pm
YANG BRHORMAT LIM KIT SIANG.
YANG BERUSAHA MODERATOR.
4. many who posted here are either residing in Malaysia or overseas, and many who are residing in malaysia maybe in different states. it may be good that the development or non development of each states be forwarded to your blog, so that actions may be taken. regardless if it is a bn or pr controlled states. example in kluang today, many farmers were by force evicted from their 40 years of plantation home. we can serve to be your eyes and ears.
5.the government is beholden to the voters and raayats, and not the reverse. instead of a last minute call for funds and human resources, it is good to start a “supporters of dap club “. we may not be memners, but we can help in many ways. the next general election may be a snap one if abdullah badawi is shown the exit.
6.if forming the government of malaysia is serious by pakatan raayat, as confidently stated by dsai, than it is crucial, that the raayat of sabah and sarawak be reached and be touched soonest. beside politics, community services of dap, is also needed.
thank you.
#38 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 2:27 pm
typo errors.
YANG BERHORMAT.
and members.
#39 by gofortruth on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 2:30 pm
cheng on soo Says:
Yesterday at 23: 43.13
gofortruth Says:
Today at 22: 57.46 (41 minutes ago)
“2nd world war which had sucked up all their military resources in killing each other all over Europe, {China was spared.}”
Sorry to disagree that “China was spared during 2nd World war, ” Haven’t you hear of Sino-Japanese War 1931 to 1945??
Truth is US mainland was SPARED!
————————–
Oops I have misled you. Yes indeed China was brutally attacked by Japan during the 2nd world war but they ran out of resources& manpower to control China especially when they also attacked USA (Pearl Harbour).
Had the West combined their resources & attacked China instead of fighting each other, can you imagine what would have been the out come for China? A small group Mongolians in the 13th century had managed to control China a formed the Yuan dynasty for hundreds of years, the same with a small group of Manchurians (Chin Dynasty in 17th century). Can you imagine how long China would fall under the combined control of the western 8 colonial powers? It is in this sense that China was spared.
USA has initially stayed out of the war and played supplier of weapons & weapon’s raw material & had accumulated enormous amount of economic wealth, hence the eventual winner that ruled the world through its economic power.
#40 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 3:14 pm
on community services, working with sister in Islam, will give you an insight how liberal they are and much they care about abused wives and committed to assist them.
even working with the police force, to solving crimes will be a good start. there are good cops and bad cops, but we still need the man in blue to safeguard our homes and families. there is this area in seremban, taman ast, where many illegal lounges, and illegal china girls are working. this is a social problem too.
thank you.
#41 by cheng on soo on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 3:40 pm
gofortruth Says:
Today at 14: 30.25 (59 minutes ago)
So I hv misunderstood yr words,
Anyway, Japan was one of the most powerful super military powers in 1930’s, 40’s, so a full scale war with Japan in 1936-1941 with practically no help from outside was no small feat. Even uncle sam dare not get involved (with Japs) before Dec.1941 (Pearl Harbour).
Yuan dynasty in China (1279 to 1368), 89 years, not hundreds of years.
#42 by undergrad2 on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 6:59 pm
ADAM,
Kit’s statements and his replies to your questions could be quoted. He has therefore to exercise extreme caution lest he falls victim to spin masters.
#43 by undergrad2 on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 7:06 pm
Kit may want to reconsider the format used once he is fully a private citizen and no longer holds any post within his Party – not even advisor, so that his views may not be equated with those of the Party he represents. Even then he may still fall victim to spinmasters.
#44 by undergrad2 on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 7:10 pm
“However, he (Jeffrey QC) declined to be my solicitor, and he is one humble gentleman. It is with respect, that I address him as SIR.” ADAM
He declined to be your solicitor?? You may want to reconsider the fee you’re offering him. Is the fee according to scale?
#45 by undergrad2 on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 7:15 pm
In the United States it costs you to sit down with a lawyer – usually $100 for one hour. You don’t want prospective clients interested only in picking your brain and then employ another lawyer or not employ any.
Lawyers got to make a living too.
#46 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 8:14 pm
Dear Undergrad2.
I beg to differ. politicians are often quoted for their statements. and politicians are public property as far as the electorates are concerned. Even in the united states, any statements by the President is quoted. whether the spin doctors spin off orbit , the underlying principles of the leader is important. Certainly, Yb Lim have to have a firm stand on policies and stick to that policies.
If what i had suggested on the six proposals, i think it helps the party too. If his conviction is strong, than stand by it. Even in silence, he can be viewed as “out of touch” . Daim made a good example of the difference between uncle kit and yab lim guan eng. i will track it and post it for you to comment.
#47 by shortie kiasu on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 10:36 pm
The paranoid West feels China is becoming a threat to them now, and the bashing has begun.
President Bush of the USA also wanted to divert their own problems in their backyard by interfering in the internal matter of other country, like China, in the name of humantarian.
Many Asian and poor countries in Africa fall into their ploy, and sung to their tune without analysing the true situation.
But the West will not win by engaging in underhand tactics.
#48 by aston on Friday, 25 April 2008 - 4:21 am
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????19???20?????????20???19????????????????????????2005????GDP??????36???????2006????GDP????6.8%???????????????????????????????????????20?????????????????????????
?????????????????Thomas Friedman?????????The World Is Flat??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
?GDP????????????????????????1986??2005???????????2005???????????????2001??2006????????????????10%?2006????10%?????20?????????10???????????????????????????????????2007???????????????????11.1%?????????11.9%??????????????????????
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????GDP?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
?????????????????????????????
???????????????????????????????????????????”???????????????????????????????”???????????????????????????”?????????”?????????”???????????”????????”????????????????????????????????????”?
???????????????????????????19??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????”?”???????????????
??”?”??????????????1.3?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????–???????–???????????GDP??????????
?????????????????????????????????????????????????”????”?”????”??????????????????????????????
?????2006???????????????Naipaul??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????????
?????????2000??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
??????????????????????????????????????1971??????????????????????22??????????????1945??????????????????95%???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????10%??????10??50????????????5%?
?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????20???????????
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????1977?????????????????????????????60???????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
???????????????????????????????–?????????–????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
???????20?????????13????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????40????????????????How Green Was My Valley??????????Maureen O’ Hara???Maureen O’ Hara????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????Maureen O’ Hara????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
?????????????????????????????????????????James Fallows?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????100???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????2000???????????????????????????????????GDP?7700????????????44000?????????????????GDP?????????????????
?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
??????????????????????????GDP?????20?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????60?????????????????????????????????20??????????
#49 by aston on Friday, 25 April 2008 - 4:24 am
?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????19?????20?????????????20?????19????????????????????????????????????????????2005???????GDP?????????36?????????????2006???????GDP????????6.8%????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????20???????????????????????????????????????????
??????????????????????????????Thomas Friedman????????????????The World Is Flat????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????ì??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????µ??????
??GDP????????????????????????????????????????????1986??2005????????????????????2005????????????????????????2001??2006???????????????????ÿ????10%??2006??????10%??????????20????ÿ??????????10???????????????????????û????????????????????????????????????2007??????????????????????????????11.1%?????????????????11.9%?????????????????????????????????????
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????õ?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????ô?????????????GDP????????????????????????????????????????ó?????????????????????????÷????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????ó????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????ô???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????Ÿ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????ô??
????ã??????????????????????ÿ???????????????
???????????????????????????£???????????????????????????????????????????”???????????????????????????????????????????????”??????????????????????????????????????????????”????????????????”???????????????”??????????????????”?????????????”????????????????????????????????????²????????????????????????”??
????????????????¡?????????????????????????ô??19???????????????????????½????·????????????????????????????????????ô?????????????????????????????á?????????????????”??”???????£?????????????????
????”??”????????????????????1.3???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????µ????
?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????á?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????ô???????????ô???????????????????????????????????????????ô?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
??ô????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????–?????????????–???????????????????GDP????????????????
?????????????????û???????????û????????????????????????????????????????????????”???????”??”???????”??????????????????????????????????????????????????
????????2006???õ??????????????????????Naipaul????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????ü??????????????????????????????????û????????????ô????????????????????????????????????? ??????????????
???????????????2000???????????????????ô?????????????????ô??????û???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????û?????????????????????á?????????????????
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????1971?????????????????????????????????22????ô????????????ä????1945????????????????????ä????????95%?????û???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????ä???????????ä??????ô?????????????????????????????????10%???????????10??50????????????????????5%??
???????????????ä????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????ä?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????û???????ä???????????????????????????????20?????????????????
?????????????????????????????????????????????·?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????1977??????????????????????????????????????????????????60?????????????????????????????????????????????
?????????????????ô?ô?????????????????????????????????????????????½?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
???????????????????????????????????????????????????–????????????????–???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????õ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
???????????20???????????????13????????????????ô???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????µ?????????ó????µ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
???????????????????????????????????????????ò????????????????????£??????????????????????????????????????????????????????40??????????õ????????????????How Green Was My Valley?????????????????Maureen O’ Hara????Maureen O’ Hara?????????????¾???????????????ã???????????????????????????????????????????????ú?????????????¡???ÿ????????????????????????ô?????????Maureen O’ Hara??????????????????ú?????????¹?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????ý??????????????????????
???????????????????????????????¿????????????¡??????????????????????????????James Fallows?????????£????????????????????????????????ú????????????????????????????????????????????????????????ã?????????????????????????????????ÿ?½?100???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????ÿ????????????????????????????????????????????????????ô????????????????????????????????????????????????????????¡????????????????????????????????????????????????????û?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????£???????????????????????????????????????????ô?????????????????????????????????????????????????2000?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????GDP??7700??????????????????????44000???????????û??????????????GDP?????????????????????????????
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
??????????????????????????????????????????GDP????????20??????ô???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????ä??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????60??????????????????????????????????????????ô??????????????20????????ô???????
#50 by aston on Friday, 25 April 2008 - 4:28 am
???@???h?????A?b?L??A?b????A?b??亚?w?]???b发??类??????变?C当?M?A??们??????讲???@个发?i????国?a?A??????这??j?????A??们??发?i????国??发?i?A????n???F?C?K?Q?~?C这个???@?????变这个?I???A当?M?O?Q???a?`杂?C?i?O?????@个关键???]???A?O19?@纪??20?@纪???????发?i?C20?@纪?B19?@纪这?????发?i?A??导?X来??????y??产?O???r?W?C2005?~???y??GDP?A?w经达???F36?E亿?????A??B2006?~???y??GDP?S?r?W?F6.8%?C这个?r?W??结?G?A?N??o现?b???@???h?H???`?N??这个?A?S?[?W?F???y??A这个???N20?h?~???@个?v响?A?N??o??产?O现?b传??????个?@??W?C
两?~?H?e?A?@个??国???W??记??A?s??Thomas Friedman?A?L写?F?@??书?s??The World Is Flat?A这?N变???F现?b??国????n???@个畅销书?C?L???N???N?O说?O?A?q过?F?????发?i?A?q过?F?H???u业?A?q过?F???y??A现?b???y????产变???????A?j?a???O?b?[?J这个??产?C这个话???L???D?z?A当?M?]???L?????C??过?A???H举这个??l?A?N?u?O说这个?N??现?b?j?a??X来?A???F?s??趋势?C
??GDP?W长????国?a?O??国?C这个?O??国国内??产总??A从1986?~??2005?~这个??长?A这个图?u??2005?~?C??国内??产?W长????????A从2001?~??2006?~?A?A??这个?????_来?t???h?C?~?O10%?A2006?~?W过?F10%?C这样??续20?h?~?A?C?~?W长?j??10个????????j国?A?O?H类历?v?W没???e????A??B这个?W长?v??????M?b?W??C2007?~??@?u??A????u报纸?W讲?A?O说?n?W长11.1%?A??G个?u??W长?O11.9%?C这个?r?W??这个????A?O???@????D?`?`?N???C
当?M?j?a?]?????D?A????O??国???F???D?`???D?A?r?W?o??厉?`?i???n?????n???Z?G?C??H现?b?b?????????????I?A?????这个?r?W??势头压?U来?C??这个?r?W?A??国这?\?j??国?a?A长????GDP?r?W?A?????v响?M????y?C这个?v响带动?F???y??经济??长?A??????H??说?k?A??国??经济发?i?O??????@?????车头?C??Q??们????b???A???N?O?`?`???D?F这个??国??这??~??经济??长?A对?_???????j???v响?C
??们???M?a?n问?A??国???p?????t发?i???????z??O???\?H?U????H?@个?~???????A谈?@?U??个?H对?_这个???n问题????k?C?N????刚?~?????k?h讲???A????O?@个经济学?a?A???O?@个?F?v学?a?A???O?@个??会学?a?C?i?O?A??O?@个??欢??????H?A??H??H?@个??欢??????H???~???????A来讲?@?U??对?_这个问题???j?????^???O???\?C
??觉?o?A??i?H?C?X来?C个???n???D?z?A?C?@个???O?D?`???n???C
??@个?A??俭?O??国传统??????????w?A这个?j?a?????D?C??们?j?a?????x???m?T?r经?n?W??说?G”????\?A戏无?q?F?j?o贤?A?|??学?F?a虽穷?A学??辍?F??虽劳?A犹?W??”?C???O?m??国ÿ?a书?n??讲?A?m??国ÿ?a书?n???A?T?a讲?G”虚??实?O?A??W谨?V”?C?t?~?@个?a??说?G”??@俭????风?A???i尽??”?C?S?@个?a??说?G”??却??俭?G?r?A别无???k?C?E???W???\???H?A?U???\?J??A???H?O??a????俭为?D”?C
??O??国???W?????w?C??们?J细?Q?Q?A这个?N??释?F为???\?b19?@纪?A??国?H?b??横?????w?j陆??铁????时??A?n??进??h??华?u?C??们?]会?F????A为???\?????国?d学??b?~国????绩?A?O?D?`?n?C这????O??国传统??头”??”这个???w?A??认为???K????关?t?C
??_”俭”???v响?A?????P???F?????国??1.3?E亿?????A这个???j???~汇储备?C这个??Q???@????s经济学???H?A???D?`??o?M?????C??B??Q????O??国?A?O?b?@个负债????国?a?A?b这点?W?D?`?C?}??国这个传统???B?@个?D?w??观???C
??G个?D?z?O?A??国?H???@??A??够坚???C这个?p?G??们?J细?Q?A??????????传统???@个??j?????@样???a???A??h?H?w经讨论过?F?C??觉?o这个?Q?k?O对???A?N?O??国??????传统?A?O?@个?H??????A????????传统?A?O?@个????????C
?H??????M??????????????@样???a???A?O?H???????`?????O?s?^??关?t?A?O?A个?H???A???a?x?B?????B?l?k?A???A???P围???a?x???j?a?x?A????会??关?t?A这个?O?e?b???n?????m?C?b?????????头?A????`?????O?A这个个?H??????关?t?A?i?O?u?O?A??????关?t?A??Z?O?A?n?h????来??释?A?A?O???F???\?n????A???F???\??????C这个?O?H?A??v为?????A??H?O?@个?`??个?H?C???\这两个????P???????????A?N产??X来?Z来??h???B?D?w?W????观???W?????@样?C
???\这个??Q?A?O??国?H??H??够???@??A??够?V?O?a?u?@?A??长?????@??A???????@样?????????D?z?C这个?????]??认为?A?N?O?]为?H???????????????A?????????观?????@样?C传统????华??????S??–??B俭?????@??–?O?????国??H?????tGDP??长???@个?D?n???]?C
??T?A??国????传统??没?????m??????A没??许?h国?a???`杂???H??冲???B?v??冲???C?m论语?n??头?N?w经???F”????无类”?C”????无类”???N???N?O说?A?A?n对?_??????H??@样????k?A?@样????|态??C
?p?G?A??F2006?~?o??诺贝尔??学奖???L???@?aNaipaul?A?L?O个?j??学?a?C?L?O?b?????w??长?A?????O?L??H?A?M?Z?A?^国??长?A现?b?~???b?^国?C?L当?M对?_?L???关??A??H???L??h参观访问?F??h???A写?F?n?L??书?C?A??L对?L????y?z?A?N会认识???A??国没?????m????O?h?\?a??运?C这?O?L?@??书??????½译??????A?m?L?? ???E?q变??????n?C
??|?A??国历?v?W??3000?h?~?A?H统?@为????????长?[传统?C这个?L?d?~??长?[传统?A?O没???@个别??国?a?????C这个传统?P????r??统?@?A??养?X来???j???V??O?C?@??W没???????j国?A???p??长?[?B?L?d?~??统?@??历?v?C
???点?A?s??国??国?H来?A对?U层??|???F?j?q???u?@?C??b?~国???F?L?Q?~?H?Z?A?b1971?~??@???^国??亲访问?A?N?Q???a讶?C?s??国??头22?~?A?h?\???\?a扫???F???C??1945?~??开??国??时??A??国??????e?H?f95%?H?W?A没???@个统计?C?i?O??i?H??v说?A????b?????????W?A当时???b?_???????W?A??时???见??????O劳?W?H???A?L?G????????O???C?????国????A???\???k?A?p?G????????H?f???[?_来?A???W过10%?C?p?G?A?u??10岁??50岁???H??话?A统计?O说????5%?C
这个?u?@?A这个扫?????u?@?A?O?@个?F???_???u?@?A?]为这个牵???H??数???h?A牵???a????广?C这个?O?@个?A??Q?A??国?F???i?H??H为????@个???N?C????A?O针对?`?`设为?S区?H?Z?A???L?G????l??L?Q?E识?r?u?H???@个???n???]?C???p没??扫???????u?@?A?`?`????@个?S区?A???i??20?h?~?H?e?N??t?a??长?C
???点?A??开???H来?A????O???Q?~来?A??国????础??设?A?????B桥???B电?I?B???Q?u?{???A??设????A???@??_?a?C??Q?????@个??国?????????H?A??会觉?o?O???i??议???@个?t??C长???w????j桥??数??A?b1977?~??时???两?y?A?Z汉???@?y?A?b?n????@?y?A???F????w经?W过60个?j桥?F?C这个???t???长?A?]?O?@个??难?Q?H???@个?t??C
这?????????t??长?????\?n处?H??对?s??进?f?B?s????产?B????组装?B???~?]装?B??陆??运输?A???????j???v响?C??H这??v响?A?]?O??H?????国?O?@??W?u业??A?@?N??国??资???@个?D?n???D?z?C?]为?q过?F这??????设?I?A?i?H减?C?????A?i?H?[????~???t??C
??C点?A??开???H来?A??国?F????务实?B虚???O灵?????{??A这?T个–点务实?B虚???灵??–???O?D?`???n???C??B?A?p?G?J细?Q?Q??话?A??实??国???~来???F???A?O??X这???????条?????C???F这???F???A创??F?w?w????会?A??H???稳?w?A???}?n???v?w环??A???j规????l??~资?????O?C这??F?????\?a??两亿?H?f脱贫?A???国?P时??为?F?@个?@??W?A?]???F?@个??费???j国?C
这??变????O?b20?L?~??内发????C??13亿???H?f??国?a?A??够这?\样?a???t??长?A这个??Q?O??国?F????o??H为????@个???N?C??们?p?G?Q?@?U???A??们?i?H?o?X???U??结论?G??国???b???????T个?@纪?H来?A?u业???R??带来????会发?i?A压缩???b?b个?@纪??头?A?N??别?H???T个?@纪?????N?C
这个过?{?????A当?M产??F问题?A??B问题产????O?h?o???o?F???C?p?G??们?^?Q?@?U?A?N?F???????国?a?A?b??长??过?{?????A?]??过?P样??经历?C???v?N记?o?b40?~?N?A?@个?o??奥???d??电?v?A?s??How Green Was My Valley?A当时?O????W???A?OMaureen O’ Hara?t???CMaureen O’ Hara?A??Q?b?y????绝?j?h数?H????晓?o?A当时???W??绿??????电?v???P?C这个电?v??讲???A?N?O爱尔兰??矿?u?H???d?h???G??C??C?@????见报纸?W讲?A?s??发??F???\问题?A??N?Q??Maureen O’ Hara??这个电?v?C?????国??矿?W??????G?B?T农问题?A????说??????问题?A??实?????_贫?I?????C贫?I?????A当?M?O?????国??关?`???j问题?A当?M?]?????F国际?C?^?????_???P??动??????评?C
?e????经?t??过?A??国?m?j???v?n???Z??????@?g???C这个?@??O?@个????W??记??A?s??James Fallows?C这个???A对?_??国贫?I??????问题??说?k?A??觉?o??????B?????C???U这?L?y话?A?O??½译过来?L??话?G????????H?h?]许觉?o?A???????国?u?H?u?@条?????O??隶劳动?A?C??仅100?????A????Y???u?@???b?u?D?????A?u?@时间??长?A?u?@??毕?A?u????b拥挤???????J?????觉?C?U???O????b?????国?x员?i?H???X???B?@???H???r?????实?G??内?a来???b?`?`?u?@???k???u?A实?b????[????????C?u资????国?H?A经济条????V?C?o?i?H??U来?o???L?G?????u资?A????D??v???e?~?M?C????条???A???b进?B?C???A??国?u?H????U钱?A??????e?~?????\????C这?O?@个??国?????W记??A?b?m?j???v?n杂????发???@?g???C?L?????A?L们???u资?O??国?u?H???Q???A?i?O???F税?H?Z?A?????Y???N没????E?A???国?u?H?Y????u?D???I?C?L?b?t?~?@个?a??说?A这??H?`?`??d?????`?`?h?u?@?A?u?@?T?~?H?Z?A?L们攒?F够?h钱?A?N?^????a?i?H盖?@???l?C
这个?O??国??现实?A?]?O??国??现实?C?p?G??们??国????国来对???@?U?A??国????O?@个???\??发?i??国?a?A??国?O?????@???经济?j国?C??国???H?????J?A??两?????k?C?@?????k?N?O?????????k?A?O?t???h2000?????@?~?C?i?O?p?G?A??????t别?]???b??头?A????H应该认为?A??国???H??GDP?O7700?????C???国???H?????J?O44000?????A??H?t?o还?O??h?C?i?O??国??GDP???W长?v????A??国???W长?v?O?????C
??国???j?p????会??问题?D?`???h?A??国??问题??较??A?]为????较?I???A??B????发?i???{??A?O?w经?j?j?a发?i?F?C??国???j问题?O贫?I?????A??国???j问题?A?O贫?I?????[?W?F负债???C
???~?A????j?a???F?@?U?l????@??~?????R?A认为??国GDP??长?A??够20?h?~这?\样?l??t?????????D?z?C??讲?F???C个?G??俭??风?B艰?W?@劳?B无???m????B长?[统?@??传统?B扫?????B???t??????w?w????会?C这个?C个?D?z?A头?|个?O?O??国?????长????传统???K????关?t?A?Z?T个?O?s??国?t???h60?~???F绩?C??Q?A??这两个?[?_来?A?]许?i?H??释为???\??国?A??够???这20?h?~??这?\??????长?C
#51 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Friday, 25 April 2008 - 8:39 am
Yang Berusaha Moderator.
I believe that aston has a problem. i thought you stated all long postings are subjected to moderation. this is not a long posting, it’s a strange posting.
#52 by lajiman on Friday, 25 April 2008 - 9:19 am
this is a world where dogs eat dogs. even some people have selective morality when addressing issues. while islam bashing is a free for all, demonising china is well…a conspiracy. What we should do is look at specific issues at judge them on their on merits. If malays discriminate other ethnics in malaysia is factual(which i believe it is) then we strive to resolve the issue. If the tibet issue demands that china leave tibet why not. The point is we all want the self determination to chart our own future.
From what i have read from so many blogs and comments made i can sense the parochialism in discussing issues. Like i said while islam is subject to bashing by all sides, including by the self-professed moralists, but when it comes to tibetans self determination all kinds of “intelectual” excuses crops up, which i can surmise from which quarters.
cheers
#53 by k1980 on Friday, 25 April 2008 - 9:53 am
For the hypocrites around the world:-
When we were the Sick Man of Asia, we were called The Yellow Peril. When we are billed to be the next Superpower, we are called The Threat.
When we closed our doors, you smuggled drugs to open markets. When we embrace Free Trade, you blame us for taking away your jobs.
When we were falling apart, you marched in your troops and wanted your fair share.
When we tried to put the broken pieces back together again, Free Tibet you screamed, it Was an Invasion!
When we tried Communism, you hated us for being Communist.
When we embrace Capitalism, you hate us for being Capitalist.
When we have a billion people, you said we were destroying the planet.
When we tried limiting our numbers, you said we abused human rights.
When we were poor, you thought we were dogs.
When we loan you cash, you blame us for your national debts.
When we build our industries, you call us Polluters.
When we sell you goods, you blame us for global warming.
When we buy oil, you call it exploitation and genocide.
When you go to war for oil, you call it liberation.
When we were lost in chaos and rampage, you demanded rules of law.
When we uphold law and order against violence, you call it violating human rights.
When we were silent, you said you wanted us to have free speech. When we are silent no more, you say we are brainwashed-xenophobics.
Why do you hate us so much, we asked. No, you answered, we don’t hate you. We don’t hate you either, But, do you understand us? Of course we do, you said, We have AFP, CNN and BBC’s…
What do you really want from us? Think hard first, then answer… Because you only get so many chances. Enough is Enough, Enough Hypocrisy for This One World.
#54 by undergrad2 on Friday, 25 April 2008 - 9:58 am
“…this is not a long posting, it’s a strange posting.” ADAM
It is not a strange posting! It is a posting by an illegal alien and in a language unknown to man.
#55 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Friday, 25 April 2008 - 10:58 am
undegrad2.
you are a great guy. man.
so some martians have an interest in Malaysia politics. haha.
anyway, you are cool man. my respect to you. you must have graduated and i will have to address as doctor than.
#56 by TheWrathOfGrapes on Friday, 25 April 2008 - 11:20 am
/// lopez Says:
Yesterday at 06: 40.38
The author should shut her mouth about things china, in fact who can say they know or understand chinese or china, what one read or gather information from someone who claim they know china have to come from some source and ….in the so called western world more precisely western influenced.
Dont interfere with things chinese, it has nothing concerning her.
Dont cross the line, it is the chinese peoples affairs. ///
Lopez, last I check Dr Noor is a male. And he probably knows more about China and Civilisation (in more ways than one) than you and I.
At least Dr Noow knows what he is talking, instead of someone who is uncivilised and can’t even get the gender right.
/// Dr. Noor’s teaching credits include the Centre for Civilisational Dialogue, University of Malaya and the Institute for Islamic Studies, Frie University of Berlin. ///
#57 by lakilompat on Friday, 25 April 2008 - 11:33 am
Social problems are an issue in China, do u know for a merely less than RM 500 i can be served like an emperor.
#58 by limkamput on Friday, 25 April 2008 - 12:11 pm
lajiman,
I agree with you totally. I think most like to suck up to China nowadays – for political support, economic opportunity and even parochial and chauvinistic reasons, etc.
What k1980 said is nice to hear, but we Asians, particularly China must critically look at ourselves. Our development model is so exploitative, unethical and damaging to environment. If the West has done all these before, please bear in mind that they are not our teachers.
Please don’t follow the illogic of Mahathir also, i.e if the West were colonial masters before, today they can not condemn violation of human rights. That to me is a stupid argument constantly put forward by third world tribal leaders.
#59 by waterfrontcoolie on Saturday, 26 April 2008 - 11:03 pm
I was sent a mail which said a German Foundation funded by the German Foreign Ministry working with an US undersecretary of State are the main culprits behind all these upheavals. Obviously many of these whites have nothing better to do. They prefer the majority of the Tibetans to be slaves under the Lamas!
To those who demand ‘democracy’ for those starving Chinese in China, please go over there and ask them their preference before you decide for them!
Please tell me, in which country today, everyone has been treated equally? Just look at our environment! US? Germany? Britain? France? B>>>s! It is easy to pass comments on others. just try to ensure 1.3 BILLION stomachs got enough to eat! India has been trumpeted by the West as a Model! Just look at their bottom 20% of the population! Yes, they enjoy democracy!!
#60 by nanyangavenger on Wednesday, 30 April 2008 - 8:07 pm
>>Yes indeed China was brutally attacked by Japan during the 2nd >>world war but they ran out of resources& manpower to control >>China especially when they also attacked USA (Pearl Harbour).
During the Sino-Japan War 1937-1945, China absorbed most of the Japanese military onslaught (and huge resources) thus sparing the rest of Asia from a more brutal Japanese military machine. The Japanese military boasted they would conquer the whole of China in 3 months; they needed 1 year just to take-over Shanghai city. This caused huge embarrassment to the Japanese military and boasted Chinese confidence and morale in fighting off the invaders. Both Chinese Nationalists and Communists armies (with material assistance from US & USSR) ultimately triumphed over the Japanese invaders by denying them the full occupation of all Chinese territory. Japan ran out of resources not because of Pearl harbour attack but due to their military campaign against China (and
their misjudgement of the Chinese people’s fighting spirit).
>>Had the West combined their resources & attacked China instead >>of fighting each other, can you imagine what would have been >>the out come for China?Can you imagine how long China would fall under the combined control of the western 8 colonial powers? It is in this sense that China was spared.
During the late 19th century, the combined Western military forces attacked the Qing Dynasty government with gunboats and legions of armies, ransacking and looting the Chinese imperial palace city; even burnt down one of the wonders of the world, the Qing Dynasty Imperial Garden. At the end of Qing Dynasty period where China was in her weakest state (also named ‘Sickman of Asia’ by Japan) she was however never conquered by any Western powers or Japan.
>A small group Mongolians in the 13th century had managed to >control China a formed the Yuan dynasty for hundreds of years, >the same with a small group of Manchurians (Chin Dynasty in 17th >century).
The ‘small’ group of Mongolians was also knows as ‘the Horde’ also conquered most of Europe & Central Asia during the same period. Yuan dynasty lasted only 97 years (1271-1368); not hundreds of years.