Hu Jintao is expected to become the new leader of the party. It will be interesting to see how much power Jiang Zemin is to retain. Jiang is forbidden by the Chinese Constitution from being President again, but that won't preclude him from remaining an important figure in the future (much as Deng Xiaoping was after he left the presidency). Interesting that executions for criminal offenses has risen in the days leading up to the congress. However, note that the linked article mistakenly identifies Chongqing as a province (it is a centrally administered municipality formerlly part of Sichuan Province) and doesn't identify Hainan as a province (it has been once since 1988 when it was split from Guangdong Province). Gee, I wonder if a certain anti-China person in these boards is now going to come and say Hainan didn't become part of China until 1988? http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/east/11/06/china.execute/index.html
Does your average non-card-carrying Chinese person get to vote? Does the Dalai Lama get to vote? Does an Uighur get to vote? Can a peasant from Sichuan Province making 2 bucks a month get to decide how his 6 children will live in the future? CCP = FASCISM by any other name
Here is an article on the next generation of rulers, and the challenges they will face. http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20021108-035321-8408r
Jiang made a strong warning against corruption at his speech opening up the Congress. The past few years have seen a crackdown on corruption. Media outlets throughout the country have been encouraged to investigate corrupt officials, and some have even resulted in death penalties. Official corruption is a capital offense in China. A couple of other things. HE stated that China would not be open to a Western-style multi-party democracy, and that any interference in the Taiwan issue would lead to war (nothing really earth shattering here.) I found a like in Chinese to the speech. If I find one in English, I will post it.
Of course the Dalai Lama can't vote. He doesn't even live in China. There are Uighurs amongst the delegates in Beijing as well as Zangzu (Tibetans). More trolls from the knowless one.
I haven't yet found the text of the speech in English, but here is a summary of his report. http://www.china.org.cn/english/features/48244.htm I also found this link that give a little information about the makeup of the delegates in Beijing for the Congress. http://www.china.org.cn/english/features/45382.htm This link doesn't mention this, but I know at the last Congress, there was at least one foreign-born (Caucasian-Australian) who was at the CPC.
So what do you think of the "dissidents" that were arrested outside of the "Congress". http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/2429885.stm
Not enough information is given in this report to really make a judgement one way or the other. What did the leaflet say (for example)?
The way they treated these dissidents are pretty much the "Ashcroft style". They put them in detention in you-don't-know-where, without even releasing their names. The difference is the USA is supposed to be a pro-First-Amendment democracy, while China is an I-am-the-law commie dictatorship.
One very, very, very, very, very, very, *very* big difference, however, is that in China's case, these are *Chinese citizens* we are talking about. The situation you are paralleling it to deals only with foreign citizens, and in that case, is reserved for terror suspects. And I *guarantee* you the prisoners the USA holds in 'undisclosed locations' (Guantanamo Bay) are treated 1000% better than the Chinese 'political' prisoners are treated. And I would call the kind of political arrests China does 'Stalin' or 'Mao Tse-tung' style. To call them 'Ashcroft Style' is frankly sickening, and doesn't even begin to imply the horror they're likely going to go through. -Adam
A judgement one way or another about what? Arresting them was to make sure NOBODY would ever read what they had to say. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/2429885.stm Here are a few more quotes from the article you refer to. According to Article #36 of the Chinese constitution the people of China have religious freedom. According to Article #35 they have freedom of speech, press and assembly. http://www.usconstitution.net/china.html#Article35 Accroding to Article 41, they have the right to petition the state. Lundai, you are so fond of quoting internaltional law and precident for stating your case about Taiwan. But I must ask you, is the Chinese Constitution followed on the mainland, or are these articles (#35,36,41) in their constitution worthless?
Corruption? Have you gotten a copy of the Harry Potter book #7 in Chinese yet? The problem is JR Krowling hasn't written it yet. But someone in China wrote a counterfit version, and is making a lot of money off of it. Of course, the real author (JR Krowling) can't do anything about it, since this person is under the protection of some person in the Communist party. Maybe someone in the Chinese press should write an article about this person. Or write a petition and hand it out in front the the 16th People Congress or something like that. How far do you think they would get? (I bet they would get to the nearest unheated jail cell in the basement of some police station.) http://discover.npr.org/features/feature.jhtml?wfId=1151741 http://www.npr.org/ramfiles/me/20021016.me.14.ram
http://iso.hrichina.org/iso/news_item.adp?news_id=1050 Hua Huiqi an active member of China's underground Chrisitian church was arrested before the 16th Party Congress.
Free from foreign control. Interesting how you ignored that part of article #36. This is due to the abuse by many Western Powers during the 19th century (especially Britain and France). Interesting thing is, when I lived in China, I went to mass almost every week in a legal, Chinese church. Are these rights absolute in any country, including the United States, or are there curbs on them. There are ways to exercise these rights in the Mainland. Why should I resort to sources like CNN and the BCC when I have actually seen all of these rights exercised while I lived there. I have never argued that things are perfect in Mainland China. However, it is also none of our business as foreigners to interfere in their internal affairs. Domestic law and international law are not the same, of course you should know that. Those rights DO exist in China, though I am sure you do not believe these words. All I can tell you is that I have seen it first hand as I have actually lived in the Middle Kingdom. Just because you dispute the carrying out of China's internal laws doesn't mean that the international community can now violate China's rights under international law. The outside world doesn't really have the right to interfere in China's internal affairs, just as European countries do not have the right to interfere in US affairs.
I saw Jiang's opening speech on CSPAN2, and boy what a moronic load of ideological bullsh**t the CP has created for itself. He talked about the need to combine Marxist-Lenninist thought, Mao thought, and Deng Xiaoping 'thought'. So this is now the Chinese Communist Party's idology??? How the hell do you combine Lennin and Mao?? Aren't the two essentially mutually exclusive? one is pro proletariat the other peasant-based. And then they talk about combining this with Deng Xiaoping 'thought'?? What the hell is this (isn't it by definition non-ideological, capitalism)? Then they talk about the need to always work for 'the people'??? I'm not saying that I would ever agree with Marxist or Maoist regimes but this just shows that the Chinese Communist Party doesn't even have an internally coherent ideology. All that matters is that its cadre of leaders maintain power through any means at their disposal.
The words free from foreign control really mean under complete control of the Communist Party of China. So if someone like Hua Huiqi wants to invite some friends over for a Bible study he and his family gets arrested. That is not religious freedom. Why not have more sympathy for people like Hua Huiqi and Ju Mei who are being held against their will then the mainland govt. of china. After all if we don't care about them now, some day they may come for you. (Of course, you have much more freedom under the rule of the DPP & KMT in Taiwan then on the mainland under the rule of the CPP) CPP thought Dictatorship is democracy. Coersed silence is freedom of speech. Worshiping the Party is religious freedom.
I'm trying very hard to think of anything that I could not post on this message board about an American politician. (.....still thinking... still thinking.....) Now if we take almost any post on this board about a western politician and have a person on the chinese mainland post the same words (with different names) what would happen to them? How about I walk in front of the Congress, or White House or Supreme Court and start handing out leaflets. Would anyone even raise an eyebrow? Do that exact same thing in near the 16th Party Congress and what happens to you? Six people just got arrested. You claimed to have actually seen these rights exercised on the mainland. I want specifics. Let's take the Harry Potter counterfeits in China as an example. I'm an aspiring journalist on the mainland looking to uncover the corrupt politician behind this counterfeiter. How would I do that?
Wow, casualfan critizing a western politician. You are a brave person. Why don't you talk about your own leaders like that, and lets see how brave you really are?
In case that you don't know, these are also American citizens (not all of them) that I am talking about. Treating them nicely doesn't mean their First Amendment right weren't violated. So "Ashcroft style" is comparable to the styles you mentioned in some degree.
Is buddism also a foreign influenced religion you are saying? Im sure you lived in Chinese state where foreigners were 'allowed' to stay. There are also churches in N.Korea (In PyongYang, foreigners can attend sermons there) also, and Im sure you can also say they have freedom of religion.
you are saing Nelson Mandela was also a criminal too? next to Stalin, no leaders killed more its own people than Mao.