Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: BubbaFred who wrote (62796)	4/26/2005 1:11:52 PM
From: RealMuLan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

>>It just looks like they (China) are trying to filter out websites that spread junks and filth. This is not a bad thing.<< Agree. That is not a bad thing since all those web sites use double standards and AVOID mentioning, conveniently, all the atrocities done by the West, and only purposefully attacking what the Chinese gov. has done wrong.

To: BubbaFred who wrote (62796)	4/26/2005 3:19:29 PM
From: Gib Bogle	Respond to of 74559

"British occupied the territory and brutally killed more than 1,000,000 people" Could you tell us when and where this happened? Not the occupation - I've read about Younghusband's expedition - but the killings. I recall a very one-sided battle, in which the Tibetans were slaughtered, but the number was 1000s at most.

To: BubbaFred who wrote (62796)	4/26/2005 3:28:33 PM
From: Gib Bogle	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

This web site: omni.cc.purdue.edu refers to the battle I mentioned. It says that 1000 were killed. No mention of large-scale killing by the British. It also says the population of Tibet at this time was 2 million. Presumably the killing of half the population would have been a noteworthy event.

To: BubbaFred who wrote (62796)	4/26/2005 4:23:33 PM
From: brian h	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

Not sure about Tibet past, but Taiwan. Please no pondering, guess, inevitable, etc. Just facts. Facts only. """The Taiwan websites ... do they mention that it was part of China for most of the last 2000 years? Do they talk about the minorities on the island who still carry Taiwan identity cards, but are forbidden from voting? Do they talk about the crimes against all people that the Japanese committed there? Do they talk about the fact that they (under the KMT) stole more than 1,000,000,000,000 dollars from China? Do they talk about that they spend more money on military than China does? Do they talk about how they aided the US in killing millions of innocent Vietnamese civilians?""" None of the above are true facts. Would you promise not to provide untrue statements especially Taiwan if I find all rebuttals to your statements? """One can go on and on and on ...."""" Why? Can you provide facts instead? BH

To: BubbaFred who wrote (62796)	4/29/2005 4:31:42 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Respond to of 74559

So two wrongs make right, right? Or is that "might"? It just looks like they (China) are trying to filter out websites that spread junks and filth. This is not a bad thing. It is different from in the US, where most of the websites spew untruths, lies, and junks. You ever hear of the market place of ideas? untruths, lies, and junks Obviously, it is you and yours who shall decide what is "untruths, lies, and junk". Maybe you should work on a time machine and see if you can get to Stalinist Russia or Hitler's Germany. They loved censorship too.