Ma Ying-jeou Labors Mightily To Top Chen Shui-bian’s Record

From a story in today’s Taiwan News, titled, "Ma apologizes for sixth time over conflict at Hsieh’s office":

Opposition Kuomintang presidential candidate Ma Ying-jeou yesterday bowed three times to apologize for the sixth time to his rival Frank Hsieh, his supporters, and [to society], in a gesture seen as damage control after four KMT legislators intruded into Hsieh’s campaign headquarters on Wednesday.

The reason for the multiple apologies was that four legislators from Ma’s party – Alex Fei, Chen Chieh, Lo Ming-tsai and Luo Shu-lei – all tried to steal documents from Hsieh’s official campaign office.  Ten days before Taiwan’s presidential election.  And they got caught.  And all hell subsequently broke loose.

Apologies are of course in order from Ma, but the Taiwan News‘ headline reminded me of a Joe Hung column in the China Post from a couple years back, where he implied Chen Shui-bian was an unfit president simply because he said he was sorry TOO FREQUENTLY:

President Chen Shui-bian is the most apologetic chief of state in Taiwan’s brief annals of democratic government — and probably in world history as well.

He has apologized ten times in the six years of his presidency.

Hey Joe, your man Ma’s not doing too shabby himself, what with 6 apologies in two and half DAYS.  That’s gotta be some kinda record too, doncha think?

If it isn’t, never fear:  there’s still seven days left till voters here go to the polls.  All Ma needs to do is average 0.6 apologies per day, and he’ll have achieved in a mere ten days what took Chen Shui-bian six long YEARS to accomplish.

Jia yo, Ma Ying-jeou!  Jia yo.

KMT Set Taiwan On The Road To Zimbabwe

"The poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the forces of the Crown.  It may be frail, its roof may shake; the wind may blow through it; the storm may enter, the rain may enter – but the King of England cannot enter; all his forces dares not cross the threshold of the ruined tenement."

– Pitt the elder

"Look around.  Turn the dump upside down if you want to.  I won’t squawk – IF you’ve got a search warrant."

– Sam Spade, from The Maltese Falcon

KMT lawbreakers gain illegal access to the campaign headquarters of Frank Hsieh, the Taiwanese independence party’s presidential candidate.  In broad daylight.  From the Taiwan NewsThursday editorial:

At approximately 4:30 p.m., KMT lawmakers Fei Hung-tai, Chen Chieh, Lo Ming-tsai and Lo Shu-lei of the Legislature’s financial affairs committee, literally dragged Finance Minister Ho Chih-chih and the president of the First Financial Holding Company to the DPP candidate’s "Taiwan Renewal" campaign headquarters and, heedless of the protests of security guards, rushed into the building and attempted to enter the personal office of the DPP [presidential] candidate.

The legislators apparently tried to bluster their way past the guards by alternately claiming they were "inspecting a public place"* or were carrying out a "fire safety inspection."  Inspecting a public place?  That’d be lie #1.  Once somebody rents a property, it’s no longer public by any stretch of the imagination.  Period.  As for the whole fire safety inspection line, I took the liberty of googling "fire safety inspection certification" on the web.  In Florida at least, certification entails 200 hours of training plus the passing of a written exam.  Yes, Florida is Florida, and Taiwan is Taiwan, so the requirements may be somewhat different.  Still, I’d be most surprised to learn that these illustrious legislators had the certification to conduct fire safety inspections, to say nothing of local fire department authorization to conduct an inspection on that particular day, in that particular locale.

The China Post provides a vivid image of what happened next:

When the group took an elevator to the 13th floor…the DPP staff cut off the power supply, trapping them inside.

(Threepio!  Shut down all the garbage mashers on the detention level!  Shut down all the garbage mashers on the detention level!)

The Taiwan News adds that the novice fire inspectors were stuck in the elevator for almost 40 minutes, and its account continues:

All four were eventually escorted out of the building by police called by Hsieh office staff and, surrounded by Hsieh supporters, the three were pushed into a police car, while Lo, the son of noted gangster and former legislator Lo Fu-chu, fled the scene.

The incident sparked a two-and-a-half hour confrontation as Hsieh’s staff, volunteers and supporters blocked police from allowing the police cars from leaving with "suspects caught in the act of committing a crime" until a Taipei District Court prosecutor arrived to take a disposition and accept charges from the Hsieh camp.

In their statement to police, the group justified their actions by claiming to be investigating allegations that the First Commercial Bank had rented office space to Hsieh’s campaign at below-market rates.  Of course, had the merry band’s "investigation" succeeded, they would have been privy to confidential campaign information belonging to their political opponent, so some might be tempted to take their alibi with a grain of salt.  At any rate, the Taiwan News correctly points out that allegations of this nature merit a letter of complaint to the appropriate prosecutor’s office, not vigilante action:

The KMT lawmakers said their action was based on "information" that the Hsieh headquarters was "illegally" using a floor of the 13-floor building, but we believe that there can be no justification whatsoever for the KMT legislators to take the law into their own hands and attempt literally to break into the headquarters office of a presidential candidate of a rival party.

In the history of elections in Taiwan, yesterday’s incident marked the first time that staff from one party had attempted to openly enter without permission the offices of another presidential candidate.

I know it’s a cliche, but I still can’t resist saying it:  What did KMT presidential candidate Ma Ying-jeou know, and when did he know it?


* Inexplicably, a link to the China Post‘s article on the subject, titled, "First melee erupts in run-up to polls," is nowhere to be found on its website.  Now c’mon, that was a front page, above-the-fold story!


UPDATE:  I’m being a bit mean asking the old Watergate question of Ma, because after all, he DID apologize, in a manner of speaking.  It was one of those everybody’s-in-the-wrong-so-no-one’s-really-to-blame deals:

Speaking in Chiayi yesterday, Ma expressed "regret" over the incident and censored the Hsieh camp [!] for "violence".

That’s something to look forward to, isn’t it?  If Ma Ying-jeou wins, I mean.  Four years of Milk-Toast Ma doing nothing but apologizing, over and over again, for the extremism of power-drunk KMT parliamentarians.

UPDATE #2:  Many thanks to Tim Maddog for finding the link to the China Post story.  The link’s been added to the post.

KMT Insists On Wasting Taiwanese Tax Dollars

Anyone remember the KMT’s whining and moaning when the Chiang Kai-shek airport was renamed Taipei-Taoyuan International?  Just think of the staggering expense, they kvetched.  Signs have to be replaced.  New letterhead needs to be re-ordered.  Staff will have to throw out all those preprinted envelopes.

Etcetera, etcetera, etcetera.

Well, lo and behold, the same KMT that claims the economy’s in the dumper is now demanding the referendums on joining the U.N. be held independently of the presidential election.  And they’re threatening to old their breath until they turn blue call on their voters to boycott the referendums if they don’t get their way.

Would it be unfair to point out that holding the referendum on a separate day would cost mucho dinero?  Whatever could have happened to all those virtuous KMT penny-pinchers?  After all, under their party’s proposal, voting halls would have to be rented – a second time.  Election workers would have to volunteer their time – again.  And economic production would fall, because voters would have to take time off work – yet again.

It’d be most instructive to see estimates as to how much Taiwan’s 81 Tyrants plan to squander in this cynical ploy to see the referendums fail for lack of sufficient turnout.*


* By law, a 50% voter turnout is required for the U.N. referendums to be valid.  A party that was genuinely interested in seeing the referendums pass would be happy to have them held on the same day as the presidential election, since voter turnout during Taiwanese presidential elections tends to be higher than for other kinds of election.

Taiwanese VP Candidate Advocates “One China” Common Market

Rather comical to watch KMT candidates bend over backwards for China…and then hop up and down angrily while denouncing political rivals for "making them wear the red hat".

Here’s a little tip fellas:  Those crimson chapeaus – you donned ’em all by yourselves.  So you look pretty ridiculous turning around now and complaining that independence supporters are the ones who somehow forced you to put ’em on.

A good example of what I’m talking about is KMT vice-presidential candidate Vincent Siew’s indignation that his "cross-strait" common market proposal is being mis-characterized as a "One China" common market.

You’re making me wear the red hat, protested Siew.  I never, ever, EVER said I wanted a "One China" common market!  What I want is a "cross-strait" common market.  Those are two COMPLETELY different animals.  And anyways, how DARE you question my patriotism?

All the semantic hair-splitting came to an end a few days later, when Siew was forced to sheepishly admit that yes, he had indeed called for the establishment of a "Greater China" market during a speech in 2005.  Sticking to his guns though, Siew continued to defend the general idea:

"China is the reason behind Taiwan’s marginalization in the international economic market. The cross-strait common market would maximize opportunities and minimize the threat," [Siew] said.  [emphasis added]

Jaws should drop when people hear that, because Siew casually acknowledges here that China is currently engaged in low-intensity economic warfare against Taiwan.  And that Taiwan should REWARD Beijing for doing so!

(For those unaware of the situation, Taiwan has been attempting to sign free-trade deals with other countries for a few years now.  Behind the scenes however, Beijing wrenches arms out of their sockets to prevent those negotiations from ever going anywhere.)

Just what is Vincent Siew’s response to this decidedly unfriendly behavior?  Does he breathe a single word of condemnation about it?  Or, better still, as a candidate for the vice-presidency, does he offer any practical suggestions as to how Taiwan can break through the economic isolation brought on by China’s unrelenting hostility?

Nope.  Siew’s panacea is, if you can’t beat ’em, join ’em.  When China walks all over Taiwan, the proper response isn’t complaint or resistance.  No, no – China must instead be EMBRACED for its acts of malice.  Battered wife syndrome isn’t a vice or some kind of pitiful disease – it’s actually a species of virtue.  Siew reasons that if Taiwan goes to Beijing on its knees and begs for a small place in the Greater China Co-Prosperity Sphere, the Communist Party of China will finally know once and for all just how much the Taiwanese truly love them.  And Beijing shall henceforth be moved towards charitable benevolence.

Such child-like faith in the universality of human kindness.  Perhaps instead of complaining about that red hat of his, Siew should consider pulling it from over his eyes.


Postscript:  A terrific editorial on the subject from Wednesday’s Taiwan News.  One particular paragraph deals with the point I attempted to make:

Ma’s claims that his future government would ban PRC produce and workers also fly in the face of the reciprocal nature of trade and economic pacts and rest entirely on Beijing’s "goodwill" to allow Taiwan to erect barriers against PRC dumping of "black heart" defective and dangerous foods and products.

Difficult to see how Taiwan could count on China’s goodwill in such an arrangement, given that Beijing’s ILL-WILL is the explicitly-stated reason this proposal was mooted in the first place!

Pakistan Unblocks YouTube

A few days ago, the Pakistani government blocked its citizens from accessing YouTube, although it couldn’t quite settle on a single excuse for the move.  After Pakistan reversed its decision, the press attempted to contact the management of YouTube about the brouhaha:

YouTube was not immediately available to confirm whether it had removed the material, which the [Pakistan Telecommunications Authority] said was controversial cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed that were republished by Danish newspapers earlier this month.  [emphasis added]

However, a story from a day later suggested the Paks had a different reason:

The [Pakistan Telecommunications Authority] told Internet service providers to restore access to the site on Tuesday afternoon after removing a video featuring a Dutch lawmaker who has said he plans to release a movie portraying Islam as fascist and prone to inciting violence against women and homosexuals.  [emphasis added]

So, their story is that they censored YouTube because of the Mohammed Cartoons.  Or Geert Wilders’ movie trailer.  Whatever.  And that they unblocked YouTube when the "offensive" clips were removed.

Now, far be it from me to tell journalists how to do their job, but uh, instead of taking the Pakistani government at their word about this (or going through the trouble of contacting the big bosses of YouTube), shouldn’t they have checked YouTube’s website to see if this stuff was actually deleted?

It really isn’t THAT hard to do:

www.youtube.com  ==>  Search Term:  Danish Mohammed Cartoons

This brings up 77 related entries (as of this posting).  Since I’m a lazy, lazy man, I can’t be bothered to page through all of them.  But glancing at the list, I notice this YouTube clip has the Mohammed cartoons.  And so does this one.  And this one. 

The Pakistani government can claim that YouTube surrendered all they like.  As I’ve demonstrated, the evidence would appear to suggest otherwise.

Moving along, let’s see what happens when we look for Geert Wilders’ movie trailer:

www.youtube.com  ==>  Search Term:  Geert Wilders

Holy smokes, 615 entries?  Sure, plenty of those are probably video responses by people who either love or hate the man.  Nonetheless, the FIRST PAGE features the trailer here, as well as Part 1 of his interview about the movie.  (And though it may seem like piling on, Part 2 is here, as well.)

Once more for the record: these aren’t recent additions. They’ve been on YouTube for 1-2 months.

No matter how you slice it, Pakistan’s government LIED about YouTube taking down "blasphemous" material – no ifs, ands or buts.  Strange the AP was uninterested in informing its readers about that little tidbit.

Teddy bear with t-shirt reading: My Name Is Mohammed The Bear.


i-1

Those Nonpolitical Olympics

Response from China over Spielberg’s pullout from the Genocide Games:

"China has been doing a lot toward the resolution of the Darfur issue," said Yuan Bin, director of the Beijing Olympics marketing department. "I want to say the Olympics should be kept nonpolitical."

So, Mr. Yuan, I take it this then means China will be dropping its long-standing opposition to Taiwan competing under its Republic of China flag?

Hmm?

Republic of China (ROC) flag.


UPDATE (Feb 24/08):  No dogs or Falun Gong members allowed.  From the Feb 23/08 ed of the Taiwan News:

[Delegates at a human rights conference in Taipei] urged the IOC to request that the Chinese Olympic National committee adhere to the fundamental spirit of the Olympic Games and abolish the announced exclusion of Falun Gong practitioners from the 2008 Olympics in a joint statement issued after the two-day international forum.

More on this from Between Heaven and Earth.


i-1