[in  translation]

Recently, Jack Cafferty said something in his program to arouse the discontent of the Chinese people.  The citizens as well as the government are pressuring CNN to apologize.  In recent days, the role of CNN (fuck his mother) has been less than laudable.  If they really wanted to make criticisms, it would be alright.  But the key point is that they have been telling bold-faced lies and that is intolerable.

The Chinese people have a love-and-hate relationship with the western media.  Sometimes, the western media reveal certain truths about China that even make the angry young people applaud and force the government to make the right changes.  As time goes by, we began to treat them as the straw that we grasp at when our lives are in danger.  We feel that they always say the right things, which the mainland Chinese media cannot do.  But the media are the media.  We naively believe that they will help us.  But they will only speak for themselves, not you.  Any media worker knows that the nature of journalism is not to reveal the truth but to mislead.

Two years ago, I shut down my blog and I told the Southern Weekend reporter: "All the media in the world are a waste of time."  Prior to that, I was interviewed by more than a dozen foreign media organizations.  After the interviews got published, it took one glance from me to see that they did not write what I meant to say.  I can understand that because I am a reporter too.  I know that it is a basic function for a reporter to take people's words out of context to suit my purpose.  Later on, I declined interviews.  I can talk to them for hours, but it is pointless because the speech right stays in their hands.

When western reporters interview Chinese people, they want to hear something sensitive and explosive.  Then they mould you into a political dissident.  This gives them a sense of achievement because you are standing on their side.  Otherwise their story would not have as much news value.

I did not have a good impression of Reuters.  When I was making the film <The Adventures of Xiao Qiang>, Reuters sent a female reporter to cover the story.  She stayed with us until past 11pm, but she never interviewed anyone during this whole time.  She went back and wrote an extremely off-base report.  I did not know whether to laugh or cry.  I called her to ask for corrections, but the repeated revisions did not satisfy me.  Michael Anti told me that I was lucky because Reuters was willing to make revisions.  I said that this was nonsense.  I was not happy with their reporting.  I cannot jump up like Huang Jianxiang and accuse the reporter of "over-interpretation" because people would accuse me of self-promotion and hyping.  But if you screw around with me, I can screw around with you too.  I know that Reuters was fastest in reporting and they also paid close attention to my blog.  So I shut the blog down and watched how they reacted.

They fell for the ruse.  Then I re-opened the blog again.  At the time, that was all that I could do.  Nothing else would have worked.  Several days later, the director of Reuters' Beijing bureau called me early in the morning.  Fuck, you don't interview people when you are supposed to and you want to interview people when you are not supposed to.  Why should I agree?  So I turned him down and went back to catch up on my sleep.

Among the western reporters that I have made contact with, some of them will report on things based upon the professional code of journalists.  But there are other reporters who do so based completely on their own subjective judgment.  It does not matter what you say to them.  They don't understand China, they are not interested in understanding China, they are just doing their job and their work is done when they turn in a report.  Whether the report is objective and fair is of secondary importance, because the main thing is whether the report fits their news values.  If the foreign correspondents are like that, it is only too normal for Jack Cafferty to say those stupid things.

When Beijing applied to host the Olympics, we said that "an open China looks towards the Olympics" so that the world can understand China.  But the other people have no interest in understanding China.  You can see this from the bungled Olympic torch relays.  They have no interest in understanding China.  It does not matter how well you do your work.  They are not interested.

On my bookshelf, there are a lot of journalism books written by Americans.  When you read this book, you get this vision.  You see how awesome their theories of journalism are: freedom of press, objectivity and fairness ... These are textbooks written by experts and include case studies.  The authors are not biased.  Their spirit for journalism are worthy for us to emulate.  But at the same time, it cannot be denied that many foreign correspondents are hacks trying to eke out a living.

The foreign media sometimes say some very stupid things, as is the case for Jack Cafferty.  You ask them to apologize, and they will strike a posture that looks like an apology because there are more interests entailed in the background.  After considering the interests trade-offs, they will apologize.  But this does not mean that they will not say more ridiculous and stupid things again in the future.  It is very easy for them to do so because all they have to do is open their mouths.

Each time that you put your hope on the western media, they will spit in your face.

That is why the exported news value is so important.

(Eastday)  But what words came out of her mouth?  Jin Jing has just said publicly that netizens should be very careful about the call to boycott Carrefour, because that company employs many Chinese employees who would be hurt by any boycott.

(ProState in Flames)  Here is a sampling of responses by netizens over at the NetEase forum:

What kinda fart is Jin Jing!  She is helping Carrefour.  I think that she is a Chinese traitor.

What kinda person is Jin Jing?  You give her a little color, and she thinks that she can run a dye mill.

First, she lost her leg.  Now she has lost her mind.

The interests of a number of Chinese employees cannot be as important as the interests of a nation.  There is no need to worry about them.  It is important to let the world that China cannot be bullied.

Fuck!  Boycott Carrefour!  Even if we have to starve to death, we must ruin Carrefour.

Many workers who got laid off get new jobs immediately.  What is the difference?  People who work there are abetting the enemy.

She went to France just once and now she thinks that she is French.  Jin Jing speaks like a Chinese traitor with no brain.  No wonder she got fired from her job.

Who is Jin Jing?  Is she famous or something?  If she does not want to join the boycott, she does not have to.  But why come out and speak?  Does she want to be cursed out?

Who the fuck is Jin Jing?  Never heard of her before.  She better disappear immediately, or she will die with her body in more than one piece.

Jin Jing???  An uncultured brainless cunt!!!  She wants to be a torch bearer.  I strong urge everybody to take her torch away by force!!!!

Jin Jing?  Athletes have strong bodies but feeble minds.  Carrefour has to pay their employees even if there is no business.  If they can't meet payroll, they have to sell their assets until they eventually close shop.

The answer is very simple.  Jin Jing must have been paid off by the French.

A cripple becomes famous by accident and now she has no idea who she is.  So she is now spewing feces from her mouth.

What kinda fart is Jin Jing!  What does a cripple know?

Another Chinese traitor makes an appearance.  Fuck this Jin something Jing!

Fuck!  You are getting raped but all you think about is getting enough to eat ...

Stop fucking bullshitting.  Any torch bearer would have protected the torch in that situation.  This is the duty of everyone and there is nothing more to be said.  When the Chinese people offer you some praise, you begin to think that you are some kind of goddess.  It is not your fault to lose your leg, but it is worse to become brain-dead.

Chinese traitor Jin Jing, your cancerous cells must have moved to your brain!

Q1.  Taiwan vice-president-elect Vincent Siew attended the Boao Forum in mainland China and met with mainland China chairman Hu Jintao.  Overall, are you satisfied with the performance of Vincent Siew:
54%: Yes
13%: No
33%: No opinion

Q2.  Overall, do you think that attendance of Vincent Siew at the Boao Forum a success?
54%: Yes
11%: No
35%: No opinioN

Q3.  Do you think that Vincent Siew's attendance at the Boao Forum demeaned Taiwan?
28%: Yes
46%: No
26%: No opinion

Q4.  If the opportunity arises, do you approve Ma Ying-jeou meeting with Hu Jintao when he becomes president officially?
67%: Approve
16%: Disapprove
18%: No opinion

Q5. What is your opinion towards unification/independence?
60%: Maintain status quo
19%: Lean towards independence
  6%: Lean towards unification

Q6. In our society, some people think that they are Chinese while other people think that they are Taiwanese.  What about you?
65%: Taiwanese
15%: Chinese
20%: Don't know/refused to answer

Q7.  Would you say that you Taiwanese?  Chinese? Or both?
46%: Taiwanese
43%: Taiwanese/Chinese
  3%: Chinese

[in translation]

Yesterday, I went to read all the comments over at ifeng.com, including the abusive ones.  Today, I was unable to do so because there were just far too many abusive comments.  However, I have found out that the abusive comments contain the following problems:

1. They are uncreative

The lack of creativity is manifested in the huge number of repetitions which recycle what others have already said.  But it is unfair for me to condemn the netizens and hold them responsible.  I regard this as an inevitable consequence of our educational system which suppresses creativity.  The lack of creativity makes the system more manageable.

There is nothing creative about the boycott.  Since the 1930's, boycotts have made no progress in the hearts and minds of the Chinese people no matter how time and space have changed.  By comparison, the Chinese in the 1939's were more outstanding.  When they began to boycott Japanese goods, they took all the Japanese products in their homes and incinerated them.  We don't see that kind of scene in the more recent boycotts of Japanese goods.  We don't see people smashing their Canon cameras, setting their Peugeots on fire, or shredding their LV handbags.  But it is not correct to say that there is no creativity whatsoever, because the boycotting netizens to today do not lack passion in destroying the possessions of others.  For example, during the anti-Japanese demonstrations of 2005, they smashed Japanese cars and restaurants -- the fact was that most of the restaurant owners were not Japanese.  On further thought, this is normal because it does not break your own heart to smash someone else's property.

2. They focus on my looks.

There are two main aspects.  First of all, they say that I look like a dog or a pig.  I have to speak up on behalf of the dogs and pigs:  "This is something among you humans, so do not get us animals involved.  Even though you humans are sometimes worse than dogs and pigs, we pigs have pigs' rights and we dogs have dogs' rights!"  That is to say, if you don't stand in someone else's place, you should not speak about how they feel.  Just because The Three Represents surrounds you all the time does not mean that you can represent others.  I was born in the Year of the Pig, and so I am happy that you say that I look like a pig.  What other animal is happier than the pig which can eat, sleep and oink all day?

On the other side, some people do not like my beard.  They even said that I have more pubic hair than facial hair.  Here, I have to clarify that this is mere subjective speculation.  A popular saying is that an abundance of hair means strong sexual desires.  For girl-chasing purposes, I have to admit that I have lots of hair.  Since I don't have good looks and I am not classy, so I cannot afford to destroy my only point of pride.  Like other netizens, I have no compunction about destroying what belongs to others but I feel pain about losing something of my own.  But no matter how much pubic hair I have, it is less than what I have on my face.  Ordinarily speaking, beards will grow without trimming but the pubic hair is unlikely to grow further below the knees on its own.  Therefore, I must express my contempt at those who are ignorant about general biological knowledge.  Whether you want to debate or abuse someone, a basic premise is that you must respect the facts.  Right or not?

3. They want to pay respect to my family or else they are concerned about my upbringing.

That is not cool.  I can deal with your being mad over what I say, but there is no need to curse out my family.  What did they ever do to you?  Right, just as you don't want people to say things about your family, you should not be saying things about other people's families.  I am supposedly a liberal (even though some people call me a faux liberal but that is unimportant).  The spirit of liberalism is individualism which implies a respect for self-determination by an individual.  Respect for self-determination by an individual conveys the basic values including diversity, tolerance, freedom, justice, equality and so on.  Damn, why am I reciting from the book?

As for my upbringing, I don't have to explain that I don't seem to look like a Frenchman.  I don't know if there was any misogyny among my ancestors.  I can check with my father.  If my father does not know, I can consult the family tree archives.  If the archives are inconclusive, I can do a DNA test.  I won't say anything that I am unsure about, especially during a quarrel.  I will not fabricate things, and I am sure that netizens won't do so either.

Please do not believe in sayings such as "a dragon gives birth to another dragon, a phoenix gives birth to another phoenix and a rat gives birth to a progeny who knows how to dig holes."  That is known as the "bloodline" theory.  Many years ago, Yu Luoke wrote the essay <About Background Origin> to refute this theory.  Unfortunately, he was sentenced to death on March 5, 1970 at the Beijing Workers Sports Stadium and the sentence was carried out immediately.  At the time, he was about the same age as you are (at 27 years old) and ten years younger than I am.  I truly believe that if this were to happened today, he would be sentenced to at most three years six months, just like the person who was sentenced to that prison term length and whose name is the same as a certain swim diver.  According to his lawyers, they were not allowed to meet with him and an appeal could not be filed.  So that was bad.  As the even more ancient Voltaire said: "I don't agree with what you say, I will defend your right to speak to death."


"Tibet will forever be an inseparable part of China"


"We protest strongly against shameless France for supporting the Tibetan splittists to attack our paralympic torch bearer.
We boycott French goods strongly and we call for all Chinese persons with conscience to take action and boycott Carrefour,
starting with myself.  Thank!"


"Go, China!  Oppose Tibet splittism!"

On Aprl 16, a dozen people showed up to protest in front of the Carrefour store in the city of Kunming, Yunnan province.  A citizen named Zhu said aloud, "Why are you boycotting Carrefour?  The majority of the products in Carrefour are Chinese products ... this is irrational." He was immediately denounced as "Nation-betraying traitor!" and then jostled around by the protestors.  Someone even threw a mineral water bottle at him.

On April 17, more than 200 people showed up at the Carrefour store again.  They used large five-star national flags to block the two entrances and showered looks of contempt upon the citizens who enter and exit the store.  Mr. Song led the slogan-chanting and he was angry at the fact that people were still shopping at Carrefour while they were demonstrating: "They are cold-hearted." That was why he was using the flags to block entry.

Meanwhile, four other netizens showed up at around 10pm and unfurled a banner: "Build harmony, oppose boycott" and "built a harmonious environment to welcome the 2008 Olympics."  They distributed a proposal to citizens: ""We try to attract foreign investors to build up the economy in Kunming, so the boycott of foreign companies creates the impression that the investment environment in Kunming is still immature ..." The letter by the four netizens.

These four netizens encountered opposition.  An old man yelled angrily at them: "Down with Chinese traitors!"  He was applauded by quite a few spectators.  The old man then took out his Nikon camera and said, "I'm going to take your photo and post it on the Internet, so that all the Chinese people can see what Chinese traitors look like!"  The police showed up but they did not stop the demonstration.  They only reminded the four netizens that a dissenter was assaulted the day before and therefore caution should be exercised.

In psychology, there is the term: the Stockholm syndrome.  Today, many mainland Chinese situations such as the nationalism and the various actions taken by the angry young people fit this famous social psychological phenomenon.

In 1973, there was a bank robbery in Stockholm (Sweden).  Three female and one male bank workers were held hostage by two robbers for six days.  After the police made the rescue, three of the hostages not only refused to help the police but did everything they could to help the robbers escape.  After the robbers were arrested and charged, these hostages refused to testify in court.  They even raised money to cover the legal expenses of the robbers.  Sweden was shocked by what happened!

Social psychologists analysed these three hostages and found out that they had been held captive in a high pressure environment under constant threat of death with periodic small favors doled out by the robbers.  Since they did not know if they will ever get out alive, their psychological states of mind underwent a subtle change.  They began to placate the captors, they became sympathetic towards them, they identified with them and they depended psychologically on them.  The experts gave this phenomenon the name "Stockholm syndrome."  The victims gradually lose their sense of self and adhered completely to the viewpoint of the captors.  In other words, they did not want freedom anymore; when help came, they declined; instead, they turned against that help.

Does this sound familiar?  In the first 30 years of the Chinese Communist rule, there were continuous political movements.  Society was in a high-pressure political environment in which everybody's lives were controlled by a small number of government officials.  This reign of terror was pervasive.  Even today, dissidents such as Hu Jia can be punished severely.  As a result, people became psychologically twisted.  They developed a strong dependency on authority.  In the end, even if society became freer and more open, and they can even go to the free world outside, they still try to defend this government!

In the recent Tibet affair, nationalism was boiling over in mainland China.  The Chinese Internet was swamped by denunciations against the western media for rumormongering.  There were cursing, even issuing threats against the western reporters.  Reporters from CNN, The Wall Street Journal, USA TODAY and Associated Press had been invited by the Chinese government to visit Tibet, and then they received harassing telephone calls, SMS and email.  One of the email to AP said: "The Chinese people do not welcome American running dogs like you.  Your reports distort the facts.   You will be damned by the heavens."  Another SMS said: "I'm going to kill you one day."

Earlier, there was an anti-CNN movement in mainland China, and the reason was dissatisfaction with the smears against China and the distortions of facts.  Why have these anti-western sentiments become mainstream Internet opinion?  Why are there so many people who "don't understand the truth"?  I believe that the netizens who are cursing and threatening are mostly ordinary citizens or just angry young people (except for a small number of Internet police with ulterior motives).  They watch CCTV or read other relevant news in mainland media about the "smear" jobs carried out by western media, they get angry and they retaliate.  Most of them are truly sincere about what they do.

The problem is, Why are they so trusting in the official mouthpieces?  Is this the result of many years of indoctrination and propaganda?

These netizens live in a high-pressure political environment.  Even the young people know more or less about the sufferings of the previous generations.  With the long-term information blockage, could their psychological states of mind have been altered?  Did they change from being victims to being sympathetic with their persecutors, the Chinese Communist authorities, to the point that they will rise to defend the latter?  Isn't this the Stockholm syndrome?

Actually, the easiest way to determine the truth of the media reports is to remove the restrictions on news gathering in Tibet, Gansu, Sichuan and other areas where Tibetans live.  Reporters from mainland China and elsewhere should be allowed to come and go as they please while being responsible for their own personal safety.  In the war against terror in Afghanistan, the two wars in Iraq and the armed clashes in Palestine, those were dangerous environments in which war reporters were allowed to work.  So why not Tibet?

Of course, people whose mind and behavior have been severely distorted may not be able to accept the truth.  They would rather stay in the prison that they created for themselves.  They depend psychologically on the "robbers" and they entrust their personal safety to the "robbers"!  The Tibet incident shows us painfully just how long and winding is the road that China still has to travel in order to become a civilized society and join the rest of the world!

Q1.  The Olympic torch relay is taking place overseas with some interference taking place.  Do you approve such actions?
48.9%: Extremely disapprove
44.5%: Disapprove
  3.2%: Approve
  0.9%: Extremely approve
  2.5%: Don't know/hard to say

Q2. On May 2, Hong Kong will be the first stop for the Olympic torch relay within China.  Will you be in the streets to watch the torch relay?
47.5%: No
37.7%: Possibly
12.9%: Definitely
  1.8%: Don't know/undecided

Q3. Is the reason why you want to watch the Olympic torch relay to express your support for China hosting the Olympics? (Base: Those who answered 'possibly' and 'definitely' in Q2)
  9.1%: No
88.6%: Yes
  2.3%: Don't know/hard to say

Q4. Do you hope that the Olympic torch relay will come through successfully in Hong Kong?
  0.2%: No
98.2%: Yes
  1.1%: Don't care
  0.5%: Don't know/hard to say

Q5.  Some people think that the Beijing Olympics is a rare opportunity for the Chinese people, so we must do everything to support it.  Do you agree?
  2.1%: Extremely disagree
  5.9%: Disagree
54.6%: Agree
37.7%: Extremely agree
  1.8%: Don't know/hard to say

Q6.  Other people think that the Beijing Olympics is a good opportunity to apply pressure on Beijing to improve human rights conditions in China as well as the Tibet issue.  Do you agree?
18.4%: Extremely disagree
51.6%: Disagree
19.5%: Agree
  2.0%: Extremely agree
  8.6%: Don't know/hard to say

Q7.  Some foreign groups are proposing to boycott the Beijing Olympics in order to pressure Beijing to improve human rights conditions in China as well as the Tibet issue.  Do you agree?
27.6%: Extremely disagree
59.6%: Disagree
  6.7%: Agree
  0.8%: Extremely agree
  5.4%: Don't know/hard to say

Q8.  Suppose there is a group or organization in Hong Kong demanding foreign government to boycott attendance at the Beijing Olympics in order to force Beijing to improve human rights conditions.  Do you agree?
28.9%: Extremely disagree
60.1%: Disagree
  5.2%: Agree
  0.6%: Extremely agree
  5.3%: Don't know/hard to say

Q9. The Beijing Olympics will take place in August this year.  Overall, do you support the Beijing Olympics and hope that it will take place successfully?
  3.9%: Extremely not supportive
  1.3%: Not supportive
44.0%: Supportive
49.7%: Extremely supportive
  1.1%: Don't know/hard to say

Q10.  Are you proud that China is hosting the Olympics?
41.3%: Extraordinarily proud
41.5%: Proud
12.9%: Not proud
  2.9%: Not proud at all
  1.4%: Don't know/hard to say

Q11. So far, do you feel that the image of China has changed as a result of its hosting of the Beijing Olympics?
  5.7%: Worse
27.9%: No change
59.1%: Better
  7.4%: Don't know/hard to say

... When May 1st, come, you go to any Carrefour store and you suddenly find:

1. The supermarket has large Chinese national flags and Olympic posters at the front entrance.
2. The Carrefour workers are handling out environment-friendly cloth bags for free in front of the stores
3. There are large advertisements in the shopping plazas: if you purchase 100 RMB or more, you will receive a patriotic t-shirt with the letters: "Tibet is an inseparable part of China.
4. The shopping plazas pronounce that all low-income people can get a 20% income and their purchases will come in bags stamped with "Carrefour will be with the Chinese people forever."
5. The shopping plaza will be flooded with Carrefour employees who were hired right after they were laid off elsewhere.

What are you going to do if the above were true?  What can you possibly do?

But you should not feel too disappointed.  Here is a video that you can use as a home exercise.  Please analyze who sang the song, what is the content, are the photos composed, how are the sub-titles written, and how the images mesh with the music?  Afterwards, please upload this video onto YouTube.  Alternately, you can assemble contents about what happened in France, render a new production, add the appropriate French-language sub-titles before uploading it to YouTube.  Personally, I think that it is more meaningful than proesting at Carrefour.

I looked at that video.  Yes, this is real propaganda.  And I also recognized a large part of it because the photos were carried on this ESWN page: The Children of Iraq.  That page was and still is real propaganda.  My present page The Olympic Torch Tour As Public Relations Disaster has been popular with tens of thousands of page views this, but The Children of Iraq has had millions of page views since inception.

But there is only depression, not gloating, here.  All those linked pages are depressing, not exuberant.

[in translation]

First, let me state my personal position:

1. I am going to boycott neither French goods nor Carrefour.  I disagree with the boycott.

2. I am not going to Carrefour on a day when my compatriots are boycotting Carrefour.  If I go to Carrefour and someone is protesting there, I will leave and go to another supermarket or come back later.

3. If I go to Carrefour now and that girl Kitty Shelley is there raising the placard by herself, I will definitely walk up and stand by her side.

Now let me tell you about my views on the boycott:

1. It is a personal attitude or emotion to boycott (or not).  This is personal freedom and also personal right.

2. To boycott or not is not an issue of correct versus incorrect, not a standard for right versus wrong, and not a way of separating people into different groups.  If you stand up to boycott, it means that you show that you either love or hate something or the other; if you don't stand up to boycott, it does not mean that you love or hate something or the other.

3. To boycott (or not) does not depend on whether the boycott is effective and useful.  The deed is more important than the outcome, the voice is more important than the result.

4. If you don't boycott, you don't need to provide a reason.  If you boycott, you need to have a reason and you need to find a target to boycott.

5. If you want to boycott the goods from a certain nation, then that nation must have harmed your nation, your compatriots or something that you really cared about in the name of that nation.  Examples are the Japanese invasion of China or the American invasion of Iraq.  But the French nation has not really harmed us in any meaningful way, even though the Olympic torch relay had been imperfect there.

6. If you want to boycott the products of a company, then that company must have harmed your nation, your compatriots, something you cared about or else done something that you disagree with.  Examples are support of terrorist activities or cruelty against animals.  The reason to boycott Carrefour was said to be because a shareholder donated money to the Dalai Lama.  Even if this is true, it depends on the purpose of that donation.  Unless this was deliberately or especially earmarked for separatist or violent activities, there is no reason to hold a boycott.

7. If you believe that the government, the politicians, the performance artistes or any other public figures did something to harm your nation, your compatriots, something you cared about or else done something you disagree with, please do not attribute this to the nation or the people of that nation as a whole.  Against the government and the politicians, you can boycott or otherwise express your unwelcome when they visit your nation.  Against the performance artistes or public figures, you can boycott their programs or express you dissatisfaction in some other way.

8.  People in other countries have the right to dislike you and your country.  They have the right to disagree with the viewpoints of you and your country.  They have the right to support the separatists in your county or anyone else that you don't like.  We should respect their rights.  We can condemn their violent acts.  If they broke the law, their national laws will punish them.

9. When you stand in front to Carrefour and some compatriots enter to make purchases, please do not blame or stop them.  Above all, you should not curse them out because we all have our own freedom and rights.  It is enough that you do what you can and you have no misgivings.

10.  When you go to make a purchase at Carrefour and you encounter compatriot protestors, you do not have to join them.  But I recommend that you should not swagger in there.  That would hurt your compatriots.  You could do as I choose -- you stay away temporarily by switching to a different supermarket or date.

11.  If you don't agree with taking action to express your patriotism, you do not have to do anything.  But please do not scorn those compatriots who take action.  They are as mentally healthy as you are and they are not "brain-damaged."

12. If you don't want to love this nation (or at least not at the moment), you do not need any reason.  But please do not make up some reason to explain your position and insult those compatriots who want to love this country or otherwise stand up to express their own feelings.  They are not "hooligans."  They also want freedom and democracy, and they know what are universal values.

He Yanguang is the chief supervisor of photograph at China  Youth Daily and also one of the most famous Chinese photojouranlists.  Bai Yansong is a CCTV program host and one of the most famous Chinese television personalities.

On April 14, He Yanguang wrote the essay "I oppose the Carrefour boycott" on his blog and this has been circulated to other forums.  On April 15, Bai Yansong published "Don't use someone else's mistake to punish yourself" at the Sohu.hom.  These two thoughtful essays were met with vigorous criticisms and abusive condemnations.  But other netizens express their firm support.

Bai Yansong wrote: "I am definitely not going to Carrefour on May 1st.  That is not because of the boycott, but because I have to be in Sanya to prepare for the coming of the Olympic flame ... It is up to the individual to decide whether to go to Carrefour on not.  Even if many people don't go due to the boycott, many others will go.  For individuals, their lives should not be interrupted by politics.  Besides, to punish oneself because of the mistake of others is giving those others too much face."  Bai Yansong also believes that "most Carrefour employees are Chinese, so the boycott is a fight within the family."

Bai's essay also said: "During the Olympic torch relay, it is true that many westerners were ugly and dreadful ... when a city hangs out a sign to greet those who were trying to interfere with the torch relay, how can you believe that they did their best?"  But Bai Yansong said: "The Olympic flame does not belong only to Beijing.  It belongs to everybody in the world.  When someone causes trouble, they are causing trouble for the whole world.  We can be more peaceful and tolerant.  If you refuse to get mad and you just continue to do what you have to do to carry forward the passionate dream implied by the Olympic torch relay, those troublemakers will be relegated into deep memory as a bunch of clows.  So let us stay calm and tolerant, and give them the chance to enter history!

Many netizens objected to Bai Yansong's viewpoints, even heaping abuse on him.  A Sanya-based netizen wrote: "After publishing the above, how dare you to come here to greet the Olympic torch that carries the patriotic passion of 1.3 billion Chinese people from various ethnic groups?"

He Yanguang's "I oppose the Carrefour boycott" is the blog post with the most number of comments in his blog.  By 11pm, there were already 600 replies.  Some were rational discussion, some were sharp criticisms and one netizen wrote: "So there is a French man named He!"

"I can understand the angr;y feelings.  People of my age have all been angry young people once upon a time ... we were hot-blooded and loyal, but we ruined the country and almost buried ourselves," he wrote.

"I would like to tell those friends who are sending SMS to call for the boycott of Carrefour that I happened to go into that supermarket yesterday and everything that I bought was made in China.  This supermarket provides employment to several hundred Chinese employees.  Behind the tens of thousands of products on the shelves, there has to be several million Chinese workers.  If this boycott should work, China will be the first to experience the chaos!"

He Yanguang does not update his blog often.  The previous blog post was written at the end of February.  When our reporter interviewed, he said that he wrote this new blog post after receiving many SMS calling to boycott Carrefour.  "Those sentiments were spreading like an infectious disease.  It was worrisome.

He Yanguang said that he expected to be condemned for writing this blog post.  But he said, "For someone who has been to prison before, what is the big deal of being cursed out?  I will only feel sad for them.  If this is patriotic, then patriotism is too simplistic.  Some of the current opinions contain a Cultural Revolution flavor.  I respect anyone who oppose me in a rational way.  But if all you know is to toss out curses, I will look down on you.  When you only curse, you embarrass those who share your ideas but prefer to be rational.

He felt that we should face the diversified international voices with rationality and tolerance.  To best way to deal with inaccurate international media reporting is to open up information.

Finally, he told the reporter that blind boycott of foreign countries will only harm China.  This is the era of globalization, so why can't we accept that point?

On April 16, many netizens were surprised to find a sea of red hearts when they opened up their MSN Messenger service.  Their friends have all added a red heart and "CHINA" in front of their names.  Netizens described this as a grand sight.

With the background of certain organizations and individuals proposing to boycott the Beijing Olympics, the Chinese netziens used their own method to express their support for the Beijing Olympics.  According to MSN, by 3pm on April 16, more than 2.3 million netizens have signed their names with Red Heart China.

At MSN, the method was to add (L)China in front of the user name.  At QQ, the users add /xinChina.  That would be displayed as a red flag in front of 'China.'  Some netizens said that compared to the boycott of Carrefour and other French products, this method of expression is more peaceful, uncontroversial and easy to participate.

The campaign began at 8am when netizens posted the instructions to add the Red Heart China/Red Flag China in front of the user names.  This signature method has spilled out from mainland China to the overseas Chinese websites.

The only controversy left was about where one should type "CHINA" or "China."  There were clearly more "CHINA"s out there than "China"s, but some netizens insisted that "China" is the correct way.

If the proposed boycott of Carrefour split netizens into opposing camps, then this new signature pre-fix campaign reached universal consensus.  Even those who decline to join in did not raised doubts.  Many people think that boycotting Carrefour and other French goods was too extreme and therefore against the basic beliefs of many people.  It may also harm China and create hostility between the Chinese and French people.  As a result, even more foreigners will boycott the Olympics."  "We cannot afford to actually help the Olympic boycott through the process of opposing some of the people involved in the boycott.  There is no problem with the red hearts.  It is a nice sight to see a see of red.  I'll willing to participate!" said netizen "streetline."

This is the Jin Jing story, which I provided in The Olympic Torch Tour As Public Relations Disaster.  I characterized this incident as a heaven-sent public relations coup that would cement the rule of the Chinese Communists for the next generation.  That is just an assertion and not falsifiable at this. time.  But this has just been further borne out by the "Heart China" campaign that is sweeping MSN in China (see Hecaitou's blog):

The conspiracy theory is that the entire Jin Jing incident was manufactured by the Chinese government precisely to achieve this public relations coup.  As usual with such conspiracy theory, the conclusion is reached first.  Then all the known evidence is marshalled to support that thesis.  If there are some inconvenient truths that contradict that thesis, they are swept under the rug.

Question: Everybody knows that the torch bearers are encircled by the contingent of Chinese People's Armed Police dressed in the blue/white track suits.  These security guys were immensely protective.  At London, they even clashed with the local police over the protection.  The British Olympics Committee president was shoved aside three times to prevent him from getting near the torch bearer.  Such being the case, then where were these people when Jin Jing was attacked?  Jin Jing was a physically handicapped person who needed extra help.  Where were those security guys?  Did they intentionally stay away to allow the attack on Jin taken place?
Answer: Read the eyewitness accounts in The Olympic Torch Tour As Public Relations Disaster and then watch the video at Dailymotion.  The blue/white security guys were assigned to protect the flame bearer.  At the time of the attack on Jin Jing, she was not the flame bearer as she was only holding an unlit torch.  She was moving towards the rendezvous point for the handover, where the torch bearer would use his lit torch to light her torch.  There were not enough blue/white Chinese security guards to adequately protect each and every torch bearer on the route the whole time.  They only followed the flame bearer.  If there was a conspiracy to allow the attacker to get near her, it was perpetrated by the French gendarmes, because they were the only visible protectors seen in the video.

Question:  Why did Jin Jing deliberately turn off the flame on her torch in order to allow her attacker to approach her? 
Answer: Read the eyewitness accounts in The Olympic Torch Tour As Public Relations Disaster: Jin Jing did not have a lit torch as she was only moving to the rendezvous point to meet the flame bearer.  The photos that showed her holding a lit torch were taken after the flame was passed to her after the attack.

Question: Chinese netizens noted that there is another photo with the attacker of Jin Jing, in which he is walking down a path.  The first thing to note that is that there are four five-star Chinese national flags and three Tibetan Snow-Mountain-Lion flags in this one photo.  The netizens wanted to know: Why are these people from opposite camps walking calmly next to each other?  Why are they not at blows with each other?

Answer: Why do you expect people from different camps to physically assault each other upon sighting?  What kind of assumption is that?  Oh, yes, this may be how they do things in China.  For example, in Are The Anti-Japanese Demonstrations Spontaneous or Stage-Managed?, the Chinese demonstrators marched towards the Japanese consulate in Shanghai and smashed the Japanese restaurants and vehicles that they saw on the way.  Those facilities and products can hardly be held responsible for the revision of Japanese history textbooks.  Maybe that is normal and expected behaviour in China.  But when you are in Paris, you observe Parisian rules on such matters.  You can look at the beginning of the Dailymotion video and you can see the crowd have a mixture of people waving the Chinese national flag, the Tibetan snow-mountain-lion flag and the black RSF five-handcuffs flag.  Do you see any street fighting?  If you expect that a fight should break out whenever the two camps get close, then there should have been fights breaking out all over Paris.  Do you recall any media story saying: "Fights and melees broke out all over Paris today as Tibetan separatists and China supporters clashed and fought with fists, rocks, sticks and poles"?  All I found is this AP report: "Outside, a few French activists supporting Tibet had a fist-fight with pro-Chinese demonstrators. The French activists spat on them and shouted, "Fascists!""  This doesn't cut it, does it?  If you think violence should have occurred, then it is your projection of your own predilection for violence.   You are saying that you would have attacked the other side if you were out there.  All I can say is: Shame on you!  But these people are in Paris and they don't have to obey your rules.

Question: In the above photo, the woman on the left appeared to be the patriotic overseas Chinese woman Qiu Yu who was interviewed by CCTV.  She explained on camera that a dark-skinned friend of hers was offered 300 Euros by some unidentified person to do something.  Thus, this photo is proof that Qiu Yu's friend is that attacker of Jin Jing.

Answer: (Mutant Palm)  "Why is this even being discussed? So a girl who kinda looks like a girl who said a friend with dark skin, who maybe is the guy that she, if it really is her, passed on a road going to the protest in a photo, was offered money by some unnamed guy who wanted him to do who knows what. Huh?"  Of course, this can be discussed --- if you don't require me to make multiple leaps of faith.

Freedom of press in Hong Kong: Satisfied/Dissatisfied: 73%/8%

Local news media:
  Responsible in their reporting: Yes/No: 25%/29%
  Give full play to freedom of speech: Yes/No: 74%/20%
  Misused/abused freedom of press: Yes/No: 65%/26%
  Practised self-censorship: Yes/No: 41%/44%
  Had scruples when criticizing HKSAR government: Yes/No: 35%/62%
  Had scruples when criticizing Central Government: Yes/No: 62%/31%

People's main source of news:
  Television: 33%
  Newspaper: 30%
  Radio: 14%
  Internet: 12%
  Magazine: 4%

The most trustworthy source:
  Television: 58%
  Newspaper: 14%
  Radio: 13%
  Internet: 3%
  Magazine: <1%

Satisfaction/Dissatisfaction rate of news source:
  Television: 72%/3%
  Radio: 56%/3%
  Newspaper: 28%/21%
  Magazine: 6%/47%
  News media in general: 50%/9%

[in translation]

After participating in the activities involving the lighting of the Olympic flame, I went on to another series of job assignments.  But I continued to pay attention every day to the progress of the Olympic torch relay.

Seven years ago, I watched with my family the announcement that Beijing had won the right to host the Olympics.  At that moment, I shed emotional and proud tears.  I deeply believe that I was not the only one.  People expect the Olympics -- whether it is hosted in Atlanta, Sydney or Greece -- to be a sports gala event as well as a meeting for peace and friendship.  Countries at war even hold ceasefire for the sake of the Olympics.  Yet, after the unhappy incidents during the torch relay in London, Paris and San Francisco, I deeply sensed the ulterior motives of certain western politicians and the biases of western media.  They stand in sharp contrast to the desire and expectations of the decent people around the world for the Beijing Olympics.

When I walk down the streets of the United States, I am often proud of my motherland.  The prosperity and beauty of Beijing and Shanghai are no less than any American city.  When I speak with people in the business sector of the United States, they all feel that the steadily developing China has made huge contributions to the world.  In recent years, we have lived through certain hardships, such as SARS, the snow storms, the avian flu ... but we came through and maintained our high economic growth rate.

Walking down the streets of Beijing late at night, I deeply realized why we are able to have peace and prosperity.  In the United States, there has just been four cases of school campus shootings with many dead innocent children.  I don't understand why certain western media would applaud the recent riots in Tibet.  Why couldn't they see the innocent lost lives which came as a result of arson and physical battery?  China is becoming strong and powerful, and they don't like the former "Sick man of East Asia" to have the same standing as they do.  On further thought, I thought that I should be content because this shows that China is going down the correct and peaceful path.  We should continue to do so with determination ...

The beautiful Olympic flame will begin the next stop.  I will pray for that, just as I pray that our motherland will become better and prettier tomorrow.  The sacred flames will bring blessings to ever more countries and peoples.  The spirit of the Olympics is about peace, progress and the enjoyment of the good life together.

My heart is with the Olympic flame!

The Chinese mediahunters found the original agency photo from which Bild cropped a section.  The cropped out section shows Nepali policemen, including one carrying a shield with the word "Nepal" on it.  The agency photograph was accompanied by the caption: "A monk, injured after a beating by the police, lies on a road in front of the Chinese Embassy's visa section office in Kathmandu March 25, 2008. Nepali police charged at protesting Tibetans with bamboo batons on Tuesday, injuring some monks and detaining dozens of others."  Bild offered no description for this cropped photo.

When asked by Chinese media to comment, Bild took some time and then updated the page.  Here is the new page.

There is now some text on the bottom of the photo: "More than one hundred Tibetan exile protestors arrested."  But just reading this would still make you think that this was happening inside China.  To find the location, you have to turn your head and the sideway text on the right hand side: "A monk in Kathmandu (Nepal)." 

(Wen Wei Po)  According to the spokesperson for Bild: "When the photo was initially used, we forgot to add an explanatory text.  We have now corrected that.  We believe that the other problems that you mentioned are solved."

Q1.  Do you want to Beijing Olympics to be held successfully?
95%: Yes
  2%: No
  3%: No opinion

Q2.  Do you support the Olympic torch relay?
90%: Yes
  4%: No
  6%: No opinion

Q3.  Certain organizations are interfering with the Olympic torch relay, including attempts to grab the torch or extinguish the flame.
  5%: Support
  5%: Accept
43%: Displeased
40%: Infuriated
  7%: No opinion

Q4.  Do you believe the interfering with the Olympic torch relay hurts the Olympic spirit?
84%: Yes
  9%: No
  7%: No opinion

Q7.  There will be an Olympic torch relay in Hong Kong.  Certain groups indicated that they will hold protest demonstrations.  Do you find that ...?
24%: Acceptable
58%: Unacceptable
18%: No opinion

[in translation]

Drunkpiano:

I thought that it was very inappropriate for certain bloggers to tell the oveseas Chinese to go back to China for marchers against the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan independence movement.  I admit that some of those marchers may be so-called "brain-dead angry young people," but most of them are not that blind.  From the BBS comments, many of those also dislike the Chinese government and its policies.

I feel that many people are supporting the protests because they thought that the western world should hear different voices, because the media around them are providing one-sided views and information just as the Chinese government does.

The march organizers repeatedly emphasized that they only want to tell the facts and let the Americans have more information that they are not aware of and also to let certain media see and report on different viewpoints.

These activities were organized spontaneously by overseas Chinese people and the funds came in the form of donations.  Even the Chinese Students and Scholars Association which is sponsored by the Chinese Embassy refuses to carry any information about these marches and protests in its newsletter because it would create the impression of official Chinese connections.

I don't understand why these bloggers can be very tolerant about the Tibetan separatists who are organized and funded by backers attacking a landmark sports event, but they are totally sarcastic towards the spontaneously organized overseas Chinese who are unhappy about the "brainwashing" in western media ... These Chinese people have the same rights and freedom of assembly and speech as the Tibetan separatists and the FLG people in the United States.  They only want to express their own views.  What is wrong with that? ...

=============================================

Q&A:

Why should the nationalistic sentiments of the Tibetans be affirmed?
Because they are seeking democracy and freedom.

Why should the nationalistic sentiments of the Han people be reviled?
Because they are brain-dead.

Why are so many people in the world against us?  Could it be that they have their reasons?
Of course we need to reflect on this, because they could have their own reasons.

Many overseas Chinese are angry.  Could it be that they have their reasons?
No, because they are all brain-dead.

The Tibetans exercise their rights to protest the torch relay.  Isn't this a normal exercise of their rights?
Of course.  This is a democratic society.

The Han exercise their rights to cheer the torch relay.  Isn't this a normal exercise of their rights?
Normal?  They are just a bunch of brain-dead people.

Shouldn't the people who oppose the Communists and seek freedom and democracy go back back to China?  Otherwise, they seem silly and cowardly?
Why?  One can express one's ideas anywhere.

Shouldn't the patriotic, nationalistic angry young people go back to China?  Otherwise they seem silly and cowardly?
Of course, because they are all brain-dead.

How come this sense of superiority feel so cheap? ...

Tibet independence?
11%: Support
71%: Oppose

Taiwan independence?
12%: Support
80%: Oppose

Historical trend chart:

(in translation)  The brain-dead stupid cunt is named Lobsang Gandan and he resides in Salt Lake City, USA.  This bastard was arrested in London for attacking a torch bearer.  He was released immediately and he went to Paris to cause more trouble.  There are only just a few Tibetan separatists who travel around the world to smear China.  Here is the detailed information:
 
Lobsang Gendun 
557 Garn Way, Salt Lake City, UT 841041.
(801) 322-2088

(MOP)  More particulars about Lobsang Gendun:

Profession: Technician
Company: O.C. Tanner
 
Utah Tibetan Association
 1120 S Davis Blvd
Bountiful, UT 84010
Mr. Topjor Chazotsang, President
Phone: (801) 292-7876
Email: pchagzoe@utah.gov
Mr. Lobsang Gendun, Sercretary
Phone: (801) 322-2088
Email: tcvlogun@yahoo.com
www.holt.org/tibet/uta.html

[Question: Should the information about Lobsang Gendun be published here?  This is the same as asking whether one wants to bury one's head in the sand.  Go to either Google or Baidu, type in "Lobsang Gendun" and this information will pop up anyway.  The purpose of this post is not to communicate the information per se.  Rather, this is an illustration of power of the human flesh search engines of China.  For a similar story, see Fallout from the Free Tibet protests by John Kennedy, Global Voices Online; New Freedom, and Peril, in Online Criticism of China by Ariana Eunjung Cha and Jill Drew, Washington Post; Chinese Student in U.S. Is Caught in Confrontation  Shaila Dewan, New York Times.]

[Question: There is still a doubt about whether Lobsang Gendun is the person who grabbed Jin Jing, since the search process does not explain how he was identified in the first place.  Once there was a name, the other information flows naturally (Salt Lake Tribune -> O.C. Tanner -> Salt Lake City -> Utah Tibetan Association to get telephone number -> Reverse telephone directory look-up to get address -> Google Maps/Earth -> physical reconnaissance to find a Toyota Corolla and a modified Dodge Neon parked outside the house, etc).  But how did the name come up initially?  The London police arrest record?]

(KSL)  Utah man receiving threats after case of mistaken identity.  April 13, 2008.

Pro-Tibetan protesters have disrupted the Olympic torch relay as it travels around the world. One such disruption happened in San Francisco last week. There were so many protesters and such heavy security, the torch relay changed routes several times to keep people from interfering. Still, the relay had to be cut short.  The situation looked the same in London just days earlier. Protests there erupted right after the torch left Wembley Stadium. Demonstrators at some points tried to grab the torch from runners, causing lots of commotion. At least 30 people were arrested.

What happened in London has disrupted the life of a Tibetan here in Utah. He's received a lot of threats in what appears to be a case of mistaken identity. A group of Tibetans have gathered at the Indian Walk-In Center. There is a vigil going on to pray for those suffering under Chinese rule in Tibet. One man there has been a part of protests in San Francisco, but he's being blamed for something that happened thousands of miles away, in London.

Lobsang Gendun, a Tibetan immigrant, said, "I totally support the Olympics. I want the Olympics to be held in China so that Chinese people will be exposed to the outside world."  But Gendun also wants the world to know about what he says is going on in his native Tibet. "There's no freedom of religion, there's no freedom of expression," he said.

Last week, Gendun traveled to San Francisco for a protest during the 2008 Olympic torch relay. His life hasn't been the same since. "First, I didn't know what was going on. My family, they were so scared."

His phone began to ring in the middle of the night. At first, they were hang-ups. More calls followed with threatening and obscene messages. Messages left on his answering machine include, "Hey, I wish you to die and go to Hell (obscenity)," and, "Please remember that if you want to be an enemy of the whole Chinese people, then you are doomed, OK?"  The calls kept coming, even during our interview this afternoon. Gendun has also received more than 100 threatening emails. All of this is because they think Gendun is the man in a picture taken as the Olympic torch passed through London. A protester tried to take the torch from a girl in a wheelchair.

Gendun says he's responded to some of the emails, and even tried to talk to some of the callers to explain they're misinformed. "Sometimes they will just swear at me, and I say, 'Thank you, thank you'. That's all I say," he told us.  The calls are coming from all over the world, including China and New York. Gendun doesn't know how he got mistaken for the man in London. If the calls continue, though, Gendun says he'll go to the police.

From The Hong Kong Standard: "Meanwhile, the Tibetan government in exile said it did not support the disruption of the Olympic torch relay around the world."  But the Chinese netizens will only remember these photos and know nothing about that disclaimer.

At noon on April 10, Coca-Cola sent a formal statement to Global Times:

Recently, certain Chinese bloggers and forums carried a photo of a Coca-Cola advertisement.  That advertisement was part of the 2003 series with the theme of "Make It Real" to promote sales in Germany.  The theme was to encourage people to try new things and enjoy life.  The series contains more than a dozen different advertisements featuring people from different walks of life enjoying themselves in different situations.

This advertisement did not contain any political or religious background and it is unrelated to Tibet independence.  We regret that this old advertisement should become misunderstood by certain Chinese bloggers and forum users who were not aware of its background.  We respect the feelings of Chinese consumers.  This old advertisement at the Bremen train station has been taken down on the same day.

Coca-Cola is an apolitical organization, and one of the accommodating brands in the world.  Coca-Cola provides services to consumers in more than 200 countries of different cultures, religions and histories.  Coca-Cola and its local bottling partners will follow international business practice and not interfere or participate in any political or religious affairs in any country.  We adhere to this position in every country around the world.

Coca-Cola began supporting and sponsoring the Olympics in 1928.  For 80 years, we have continued to support the Olympic movement around the world.  As a partner of the 2008 Beijing Olympics and the Olympic torch relay, we are actively participating in this global athletic competition.

Related Link:  Today’s SchizOlympics Moment of Zen  Mutant Palm

Archives