Ardern won’t condemn China over Anne-Marie Brady

“I wouldn’t want to set any expectation that I’d be generally briefed on an individual’s case… I expect that based on what [police] investigation concludes, that they would act appropriately,” PM Jacinda Ardern says, of the Anne-Marie Brady case.

Jacinda Ardern told us she wouldn’t intervene in how the Police investigated Dr Brady’s complaint. She says she had no reports that national security issues were involved.

 

Leave a comment

47 Comments

  1. Noel

     /  November 27, 2018

    Wondered why they didn’t make much noise over the JLR closeness to Chinese money claims.

    Reply
    • Noel

       /  November 27, 2018

      On reflection I’m guessing the Chinese Embassy would have already predicted that outcome.

      Reply
    • David

       /  November 27, 2018

      You will find the vast vast majority of “Chinese” in Auckland are citizens or permanent residents..3rd and 4th generations for many and as Kiwis they are quite entitled to make any sort of political donation without the racist undertones.

      Reply
      • Kitty Catkin

         /  November 27, 2018

        My Chinese bridesmaid’s family was 3rd generation on one side and 4th on the other.

        Reply
        • David

           /  November 27, 2018

          Exactly, its very racist where anyone with an Asian appearance is just dismissed as a foreigner.
          Peters and Twyford bare a lot of responsibility for people to think its fine to just throw around some casual racism.

          Reply
          • Gezza

             /  November 27, 2018

            It wasn’t racism with Phil. You have to remember that Phil is simply as thick as pigshit. It would never have even occurred to him that picking out Chinese surnames in attempt to prove foreigners were buying up all our houses might be seen as racist. He’s only guilty of casual gormlessism.

            Winston, yep, have to agree there.

            Reply
          • Blazer

             /  December 3, 2018

            as for bearing responsibility….’2 chinese are better than 2 indians…and I’ll raise you a filipino! Bol.

            Reply
  2. Geoffrey Monks

     /  November 27, 2018

    Reckon the pm is between a rock and a very hard place. Hopefully there will be some behind the scene expressions of disapproval being made to the Ambasador. Equally hopefully, China will wind it back a bit but I am not holding my breath on that one.

    Reply
    • NOEL

       /  November 27, 2018

      I dunno Geoffrey. She’s continuously making it harder for any negotiations on the Steel tariffs ever presenting a favourable out come for New Zealand.
      It’s a rock of her own making. I’m guessing our Five Eyes partners won’t be so cooperative if she keeps on this track.

      Reply
  3. Geoffrey Monks

     /  November 27, 2018

    There is a hint that she learning to keep her lip buttoned and to not ask questions of the SIS (and others) to which answers could prove awkward.

    Reply
  4. Kitty Catkin

     /  November 27, 2018

    She’s damned if she does and damned if she doesn’t. It’s a cruel world, baby, and being PM isn’t all photo ops.

    If it turns out not to be anything to do with China, it would be the political embarrassment of all time if they are investigated.

    If it is China and they are not investigated….

    My guess is that we are too small for China to bother much about our politics.

    Reply
    • Gezza

       /  November 27, 2018

      Never too small to be a voice for China’s interests in the UN.

      Reply
    • Missy

       /  November 28, 2018

      “My guess is that we are too small for China to bother much about our politics.”

      That is a very naïve view to take. NZ is part of the largest and most prolific Intelligence sharing alliance in the world, we are a major player in the Pacific, if you don’t think that those factors put us into a position of China wanting to influence our politics then you really don’t have much understanding of International Relations.

      Reply
      • Kitty Catkin

         /  November 28, 2018

        All right, all right, there’s no need to be nasty about it.

        I still don’t think that we are top of the list for China.

        I do have an understanding of these things; my ex-partner worked for Foreign Affairs and my late husband was involved with politics and had a great knowledge of things like International Relations.

        Reply
  5. David

     /  November 27, 2018

    Ardern has done the right thing here, difficult situation for her but she is right in that there is no hard evidence and frankly she doesnt want to put billions at risk over one disgruntled anti Chinese professor .
    She is getting more Trump like and she is growing on me.

    Reply
    • Kitty Catkin

       /  November 27, 2018

      Not on me.

      Reply
    • The Consultant

       /  December 2, 2018

      … there is no hard evidence…

      She’s just about the only academic in NZ who produces a deep-dive critique of China’s actions in NZ – and she gets burgled with just laptops and the like stolen.

      FFS. “hard” evidence? How about seriously strong circumstantial? That is actually enough to convict people on in Western jurisdictions. As the saying goes, do you want me to draw you a map? Here, read a bunch of stuff on this whole saga from a former Treasury economist who usually does not give a shit about foreign policy, Croaking Cassandra – China

      Reply
  6. Geoffrey Monks

     /  November 27, 2018

    Could this be her Saudi moment? If so, let’s hope she does NOT emulate Trump

    Reply
  7. duperez

     /  November 27, 2018

    I almost can’t believe that a Prime Minister is in the spotlight for not condemning someone not even charged with, and certainly not convicted of some misdemeanour.

    The implication that a PM is weak, or not doing the job, or bowing to fear, or whatever, for not condemning someone in the circumstance is bizarre.

    I read somewhere of some academics signing some letter or petition motivated by the Anne-Marie Brady situation. I wonder if any of them think there’s anything untoward about accusations and suspicions moving so quickly to hangings.

    Reply
  8. Geoffrey

     /  November 28, 2018

    One does not have to look hard to perceive a deliberate expansion of Chinese influence into the South China Sea and the Pacific. Where the water gaps are too large, they have built islands. Where they are not, they have bought Islands. We are presently being joggled to fall into line. How we respond to that is of critical importance and will require top end statesmanship if we are to survive with our security and trade intact.

    Reply
  9. Mark

     /  December 2, 2018

    Just don’t see how the Chinese would have benefited from being seen to be intimidating Brady – it has shone a huge light on her work. The break-ins and vehicle tampering are just as likely to have been done by people hostile to Chinese interests, or perhaps a misguided Chinese youth thinking he is actually helping the motherland.

    And then there is Brady herself. She is apparently so intimidated by the Chinese government, she has just returned from China after a month in the country and by her own admission was ‘completely fine’.
    https://www.newsroom.co.nz/2017/11/13/60044/govt-urged-to-probe-chinas-influence

    Does that not strike one as somewhat odd?

    Reply
    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  December 2, 2018

      Very interesting comment, Mark.

      Reply
    • The Consultant

       /  December 2, 2018

      Heh, heh, heh

      So, “Mark” has now done the Sinophobe line on three blogs, and with identical arguments:
      – Bowalley Road
      – Kiwipolitico
      – here.

      Let me just quote from Paul Buchanan of “Kiwipolitico”:

      Mark:

      You are a lying troll. If you speak and read Chinese you know damn well what is written and said in the Mandarin language media, including social media such as the link I provided to that laughable clown known as Morgan Xiao (and btw, Labour needs to kick that moron to the curb ASAP).

      I have no obligation to justify anything to you because, among other evidence, Professor Brady has given examples of what I have mentioned, as has the redoubtable Mr. Xiao. As for the rest, the Wilson Centre is a world-renown institution of higher research including, among many other things, authoritarian demise and democratisation efforts around the world.

      I have spent a fair bit of time there and if anything the resident scholars like to buck government orthodoxy. That Brady was made a Global Fellow indicates appreciation of her intellectual labour, not bias. On this, you are an ignorant fool.

      Reply
  10. The Consultant

     /  December 2, 2018

    oh – and here’s “Mark’s” comments about Michael Riddell and his blog Croaking Cassandra:

    I’ve read some of his drivel, and it is exactly that.Comparing the economic performance of China with cities like hong Kong and Singapore and countries which had almost a century head start when it comes to industrialisation (like Japan) shows he is a buffoon. And of course he completely ignores the impact of a century of foreign invasions of China in impoverishing the place, something that only stopped with the communist victory in 1949.

    Were it Geoff Fischer or some of the other normal crowd at Trotter’s place, I’d simply put this down to the usual one-eyed view of Western Imperialism, but “Mark” has revealed himself as just another Chinese troll, willing to excuse their government anything. As Buchanan put it in another comment, responding to one of Chris Trotter’s regular clowns on this issue:

    I say, ask the Uighurs about that or any of the PRC neighbours adjoining the South China Sea. Because it turns out evil has many languages and a dominant one these days is Mandarin.

    If proof comes out that it was a false flag op or Brady did it to herself, then I will issue a public apology for reading things wrong. But if the story substantiates what I suspect, I expect Geoff to publicly recognise his error.

    Reply
  11. Mark

     /  December 2, 2018

    Paul Buchanan made this claim:
    “It behooves readers to read, watch and listen to the Mandarin-language media here in NZ (even if needing translators) because the rhetoric employed by these outlets….s hostile to the point of threatening towards all those who do not toe the Party line”

    He was asked to provide a single example. He could not – so he spat the dummy. Then his rhetoric turned extremely nasty to the point of even being violent, and he deleted my posts. Obviously the blog is his own, so he has that right, but his actions show

    Now I restate for your consideration:

    Brady has just returned from a month’s visit in China, and by her own admission: “Nothing happened to me there. I was completely fine.”

    If she really was feeling as intimidated as she has been making out to be, surely mainland China would be the last place on earth she would want to spend a month in?

    Reply
  12. The Consultant

     /  December 2, 2018

    More from that Buchanan thread….

    I have no interest in indulging trolls so gave this a**wipe the boot. I indulge Geoff only this once because he is a known entity, but the “give me evidence” line is fatuous given:
    a) the silence of the cops and
    b) the alternative possibilities I drew out in the post.

    And whatever the evidence, ole Geoff tacitly joins the troll in the “she deserved it” crowd. I guess he and and the skidmark fellow believe that the allegations are all made up and just done to smear the good folk leading the PRC. In fact, that is pretty much what skidmark said, so Geoff just lowered himself into that ethical long drop.

    If she really was feeling as intimidated as she has been making out to be, surely mainland China would be the last place on earth she would want to spend a month in?

    That’s you big rationale. Wow. As Paul says – tell me the allegations are all made up. You know you want to.

    Or try this on for size: she’s not intimidated by the efforts of the PRC (or their friends in NZ) to make it clear that they’re watching her, so she goes on analysing, commentating and, yes, visiting China. She’d hardly be the first dessenter in history to demonstrate that sort of “in-your-face” courage.

    Though I’m sure courage is something beyond your comprehension.

    Reply
  13. The Consultant

     /  December 2, 2018

    Oh – and since you’re banging the whole drum about US connections, try this article on for size, The Return of Ezekiel:

    Opposite the American wharf, two massive buildings glared at each other from either sides of a road. Both were surrounded by metal fences with peaks that looked sharp enough to stick a head on. The fences were punctuated by gates and guardhouses. According to Tongan construction workers who have been allowed through those gates, each of the buildings will eventually extend for three stories into the earth, as well as four stories above it.

    Chinese diplomats say that the new buildings opposite the American wharf will be the site of an embassy; observers like the veteran Pacific journalist Michael Field and the Tongan-based sociologist Michael Horowitz fear that they might soon house a spy base, or some other covert military facility. In a recent article for a Japanese newspaper, Field noted the surreal details the Chinese are giving the buildings — they will be, for example, the only structures in Tonga with snow-proof roofs — and pointed out that they are far larger than they need to be, if they are intended only as homes and offices for a team of diplomats.

    That’s Tonga.

    Last year Tonga’s Prime Minister startled a press conference by predicting glumly that ‘China will take over the running’ of Tonga ‘in a few years’ time’. A couple of months ago, while he was preparing for the Pacific Islands Forum, ‘Akilisi Pohiva repeated his message, and suggested that the new port his predecessor had paid for with borrowed money might eventually be seized by China, in lieu of interest payments.

    Pohiva urged other Pacific leaders to help him argue for debt forgiveness; after a phone call from Beijing, though, he hurriedly withdrew his appeal, and issued a press release in which he said that his nation ‘attaches great importance to its relations with China’.

    Sounds like you.

    As the author more concisely summarised it in a Kiwiblog thread a couple of months ago:

    Then there’s China’s old-fashioned debt trap diplomacy. Small Pacific states like Tonga and Fiji are now hopelessly indebted to China, and are allowing Beijing’s security forces to operate with impunity on their own territory, as the recent arrest of 77 Chinese nationals wanted by Beijing by an elite squad of cops flown in to Fiji showed.

    NZ itself is now economically dependent on exports to China, even as it continues its traditional defence r’ship with the US and Australia. China has previously shown it’s happy to use the threat of sanctions to pressure First World governments to do its will – Norway, for example, got the squeeze after it awarded a Nobel prize to a Chinese dissident.

    If NZ joins the coalition of Asian nations trying to stop Beijing seizing the South China Sea and blocking other nations’ shipping there, then we can expect threats. In the long term, we may have to choose between a drastically reduced standard of living or colony status. But the infiltration of both Labour and National by Chinese sympathisers and outright spies makes a public debate on these matters difficult.

    The author is a guy named Scott Hamilton, a well know historian who focuses on Pacific Island peoples, including Maori in NZ: Reading The Maps.

    You might want to backcheck his story a bit before you crash in with the whole standard line of “US stooges”, or whatever line Beijing is feeding you now.

    Reply
    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  December 3, 2018

      Also an interesting facet but hard to get a feel for the popular view there.

      Reply
    • Mark

       /  December 3, 2018

      Seems like a lot of conjecture on the part of a person who is hardly an expert in these sorts of things.

      Nevertheless I would be very surprised if China does not use the embassy as a spy base – if they could get away with it. Nothing unique about China’s behaviour here (assuming it is true).

      After all, most countries spy, and particularly countries like the US, China, and even France and Australia.

      But China is unlikely to carry out a terrorist attack in NZ (as France did), or test their atomic weapons over the homes of Pacific islanders (as the US and France did).

      So if the Chinese limit their activities to soft power and spying, then that’s an improvement over the others already.

      Reply
  14. Mark

     /  December 2, 2018

    Be good to engage in a polite conversation, rather than have you overloading the board with spam – or is that a sign of your desperation?

    Nevertheless I will address this point:

    “Or try this on for size: she’s not intimidated by the efforts of the PRC (or their friends in NZ) to make it clear that they’re watching her, so she goes on analysing, commentating and, yes, visiting China. She’d hardly be the first dessenter in history to demonstrate that sort of “in-your-face” courage.”

    Brady knows full well the worst that could possibly happen is she is turned away at the border – as has happened recently to this journalist who supports Hong Kong independence:
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/10/09/hong-kong-leader-refuses-say-british-journalistvictor-mallet/

    This Chinese journalist:
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/feb/15/chinese-journalist-banned-from-flying-to-us-to-accept-a-prize-for-his-work

    Or expelled as in the case of Ursula Gauthier
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/dec/31/ursula-gauthier-foreign-media-must-fight-china-censorship-says-expelled-journalist

    There are a huge number of people who the Chinese find irksome –but they have never resorted to assassinations or terrorism etc —not even China’s most strident critics suggest that. The most that happens is you don’t get let in our you get booted out if you are already in.

    Brad, as a China ‘expert’ knows this full well. She felt perfectly safe all along. No courage required here.

    Reply
  15. Mark

     /  December 3, 2018

    You quote Buchanan:

    “but the “give me evidence” line is fatuous given:
    a) the silence of the cops and
    b) the alternative possibilities I drew out in the post. “

    This is disingenuous from both Buchanan and yourself. I never asked for evidence from Buchanan in respect of the Brady case.

    I simply asked Buchanan to justify his claim that chinese media in NZ was being “hostile to the point of threatening towards all those who do not toe the Party line”, and show me the links, or at least describe the offending comments. And I also said that if there were threatening comments the police should become involved – I’m sure you would also agree.

    However, Buchanan could not provide anything to substantiate his claim –so he had to resort to an angry rant and deflect- sort of like what you are doing now.

    Reply
  16. The Consultant

     /  December 3, 2018

    However, Buchanan could not provide anything to substantiate his claim

    The substantiation was in the original Brady articles and the multiple links to Chinese speakers in NZ that both he and I provided, of people who have gone on record as to what’s happening in the NZ Chinese media. As Buchanan said – and it was about the Chinese media:

    including social media such as the link I provided to that laughable clown known as Morgan Xiao

    I have no obligation to justify anything to you because, among other evidence, Professor Brady has given examples of what I have mentioned, as has the redoubtable Mr. Xiao.

    But I’m more forgiving than Mr Buchanan so I’ll indulge you – a little. From those links, here’s Brady herself:

    “New Zealand’s Chinese media has gone from being independent to being merged with the domestic media in China,” she said. “When you pick up one of our local Chinese papers or go to Chinese language sites they look a lot like you would find in mainland China,” she said.

    “I’ve been reading our Chinese language media since the late 1980s and listening to the radio stations. It was a real delight hearing an authentic New Zealand Chinese voice. We’re really not getting that now,” Prof Brady told Mediawatch.

    And this:

    Commentary in local Chinese-language media has been an especially heated, with a recent op-ed by Morgan Xiao – published simultaneously by SkyKiwi, the Mandarin Pages and the New Zealand Chinese Daily News – describing Brady and other New Zealand-Chinese democracy activists as “anti-Chinese sons of bitches” who should “get out of New Zealand”.

    Freeman Yu, whose New Zealand Values Alliance has started a petition urging the government to follow Australia’s lead and curb China’s local influence, was also called out by Xiao. Yu said the language used in local debate had recently hardened, with “extreme expressions used in the Cultural Revolution”. “The language used in their articles expressed intense hatred for different voices and the freedom of speech,” he said.

    Plenty more where those came from too.

    But I know your “demand for proof” was just a debating tactic to imply that no proof existed. Like Buchanan I’m not going to waste my time further when I know it’s a trolling, bad-faith demand, as evidenced by your refusal to follow the links provided in the first place. As he said, your “give me evidence” line is fatuous.

    In any case it comes down to a matter of people who don’t speak the language trusting people who do and are willing to comment under their own names and identities – vs. trusting an anonymous commentator called “Mark” who attacks only that single plank in the entire debate about CCP influence in NZ, demanding to be shown actual, translated statements.

    And naturally you did not argue with any of the other points because they’re well documented tactics used by China across many countries; a pattern of influence and non-violent intimidation beyond dispute that requires no translation, but merely an observation of actions. Speaking of which:

    Yikun Zhang
    Jian Yang (National)
    Raymond Hao (Labour)

    This is like the Sherlock case of the dog that didn’t bark; none of these men have ever uttered even the mildest rebuke of criticism of China.

    “Always go with the Party”.

    Right “Mark”?

    Reply
    • Mark

       /  December 3, 2018

      Oh for heaven’s sake – again no links to threatening statements in the Chinese media – just assurances they are there.

      And Brady’s report has none as well. Have a look for yourself.
      Brady’s report on ‘magic weapons’ linked here:
      https://www.wilsoncenter.org/article/magic-weapons-chinas-political-influence-activities-under-xi-jinping

      And by the way, Brady is paid by the Wilson Centre (and the Taiwanese). That’s her right of course, but Paul Buchanan without a hint of irony defends this saying “the Wilson Centre is a world-renown institution of higher research including, among many other things, authoritarian demise and democratisation efforts around the world.”

      So Brady is funded by a neo-con think tank that admittedly advocates for colour revolutions and regime change, all around the world, in countries that don’t toe the US line.

      She is an obvious tool of foreign interference and soft power in NZ herself.

      Reply
      • The Consultant

         /  December 3, 2018

        again no links to threatening statements in the Chinese media

        You must be blind.

        a recent op-ed by Morgan Xiao – published simultaneously by SkyKiwi, the Mandarin Pages and the New Zealand Chinese Daily News – describing Brady and other New Zealand-Chinese democracy activists as “anti-Chinese sons of bitches” who should “get out of New Zealand”.

        Deaf and dumb also.

        So Brady is funded by a neo-con think tank that admittedly advocates for colour revolutions and regime change, all around the world, in countries that don’t toe the US line.

        She is an obvious tool of foreign interference and soft power in NZ herself.

        She’s on the same side of this issue as Scott Hamilton, whom I can’t wait to see you accuse of being a US stooge.

        And since you’re so free in throwing that about, how about your slavish devotion to the CCP line: ideological or are you paid by them.

        Reply
      • The Consultant

         /  December 3, 2018

        a neo-con think tank

        Ah yes. Another of the cliched soundbites.

        As it happens, The Wilson Center predates the “neo-cons” by many decades, and were it a hive of “neo-con” thinking, then Buchanan would be the first to attack it, given the ferocious attacks he has launched over the years on actual neo-cons like Kristol and company.

        Again – denigrating insult of the source rather than actual debate of the arguments, and in this case a very poorly mis-applied insult as well.

        In any case: why would anybody be afraid of a think-tank that has advocated for authoritarian demise and democratisation efforts – except a person who loves authoritarians and hates democracy?

        Reply
  17. The Consultant

     /  December 3, 2018

    And these little snippets of your “debate” style.

    Be good to engage in a polite conversation,…

    That went out the window the moment you called former Treasury economist, Michael Riddell, a “buffoon”, which makes your plea nothing more than a tone argument – after you’ve lowered the tone.

    There are a huge number of people who the Chinese find irksome –but they have never resorted to assassinations or terrorism etc —not even China’s most strident critics suggest that.

    Then why bring it up? The answer is that you needed a straw-man to burn down and you extrapolated from Buchanan’s original use of the word ”threaten” to then talk only of assassinations and terrorism. Not a very subtle debating tactic.

    In fact this whole topic is about China’s “soft-power” influences in foreign countries like New Zealand; not direct violence, but threatening none the less to people’s livelihoods. That soft-power is primarily via media and business, plus political influence via those business connections and donations. All that, plus a little bit of intimidation like burglaries of Brady to let her know that she’s being watched, or the various rent-a-mobs that confront Falun Gong – not in China, but right here in NZ.

    Reply
    • Mark

       /  December 3, 2018

      “The answer is that you needed a straw-man to burn down and you extrapolated from Buchanan’s original use of the word ”threaten” to then talk only of assassinations and terrorism.”

      Brady says she fears for her personal safety and that of her family. She knows darn well there is nothing to fear in terms of her personal safety – at least from the Chinese government. And she knows it, and that was the point I was trying to make – but which obviously went way over your heard.

      Now, be a good chap, and provide the sources proving that local Chinese media have been “hostile to the point of threatening towards all those who do not toe the Party line”

      Reply
      • The Consultant

         /  December 3, 2018

        Personal safety also includes not having your house burgled for laptops and other materials to do with your research.

        I’m quite sure that when any burglary happens it’s a threat to “personal safety” – and I’m sure you knew that too as you leaped into the world of assassination.

        Reply
        • Mark

           /  December 3, 2018

          I’m confident that it either (1) Brady herself, or (2) someone hostile to China, or (3) just an ordinary break-in.

          The fact that the cops are taking so long over it points to the first possibility as being a very very real one.

          Reply
  18. Geoffrey Monks

     /  December 3, 2018

    Being last to utter will never make Mark correct: just persistent

    Reply
  19. The Consultant

     /  December 3, 2018

    In case it was not obvious already, Mark is a full-blown CCP apologist. There is literally nothing they do that he won’t rationalise away. As such he does not fall into the usual Left-wing or Right-wing groups arguing over all this – he’s just a simple CCP apologist, for whatever personal reasons drive him.

    Key points that these trolls always bring up:

    – “Colour” revolutions (Putin’s drum but applicable here too)

    – Regime change (Yes, the terror of single party states everywhere)

    – Britain, colonialisaton and the Opium wars.

    – whataboutism with US Foreign Policy, ignoring the fact that some very hardline critics of that, including of past regime change efforts by the US, spying and all the rest, people like Scott Hamilton and Paul Buchanan, as Lefty as they come, are the critics of China’s new colonisation policy, even if this one comes with loans and labourers rather than gunboats.

    – defence of Chinese economic growth and development under both the post-1980 and pre-1980 regimes.

    – Taiwan: the great symbolic problem that’s going to be “solved” by the CCP before their 100th anniversary of power in 2049.

    You can see past examples of this with this Kiwiblog commentator in 2011, A Single Spark:

    That is why the Chinese government is overwhelmingly popular. It resists Western lecturing on ‘human rights’ and Taiwan and Tibet.

    .

    Or Zhumao, also from 2010 Kiwiblog:

    China has little to learn from the West in terms of ‘humane’ values. Unless those ‘humane’ values you speak of include forcing other people to buy narcotics at gunpoint ala the Opium War, forcing an invaded nation to indemnify the invading nations ala Boxer indemnities, or putting up signs in Chinese parks saying ‘no dogs or chinese allowed’

    The West should just butt the f%#$ out of China’s internal affairs, and instead develop good respectful relations for the benefit of both the West and China.

    They may well have been the same person, what with the allusions of their names to Mao and company, but you can see they are the same sort,

    Reply
  20. Mark

     /  December 3, 2018

    Read Single Spark and Zhumao’s comments —I wish I had written them, as they are evidence and facts based and irrefutable.

    And are you some sort of stalker dude? Its hard case seeing you run round in a panic trying to put out little fires here and there….don’t over-exert and give yourself a stroke!

    “Taiwan: the great symbolic problem that’s going to be “solved” by the CCP before their 100th anniversary of power in 2049.”

    Actually probably a lot earlier. Do you not keep up with the news?

    https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/26/taiwan-election-china-is-big-winner-as-tsai-ing-wens-dpp-party-loses.html

    By the way, it is interesting that Taiwan supports China’s South China Sea claim. That is because Taiwan also considers Taiwan part of China. That is why they call themselves the ROC (Republic of China).:
    http://www.atimes.com/article/why-china-and-taiwan-agree-on-the-south-china-sea/

    Silly Americans – they think by helping Taiwan they are pissing off China. China just acts pissed off. Secretly they are happy with the US handing over advanced weaponry to the Taiwanese.

    Reply
  21. The Consultant

     /  December 3, 2018

    Its hard case seeing you run round in a panic trying…

    Chuckle. Yet another failed debating tactic.

    Still, I’m glad you have no shame in supporting the CCP. Gives you zero crediblity, which is what I was hoping for if you make the mistake of turning up for future debates.

    In the West we criticise everybody, including your precious Beijing Masters. You live here long enough you might learn how important that is, although I’m now sure you’ll never understand democracy.

    Reply
    • Mark

       /  December 4, 2018

      Huh? Debating tactic? Just an expression of genuine concern for your health.

      Beijing masters? Supporting CCP? Nah….simply support the truth based on seeking truth from facts. Something you’ll never understand.

      And you ‘ll also never understand the challenges of hauling a formerly desperately backward country of a billion a people steeped in feudal traditions and superstitions, into the modern age, with a goal to eliminate poverty in the early 2020s (something they just may be able to pull off), all the while keeping the country politically intact and warding off foreign aggressors. That’s true human rights!
      https://www.forbes.com/sites/sarahsu/2016/08/19/china-wipe-out-poverty/#4f6957c77d7a

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s