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 : Asia Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ron Bower who wrote (8286)	3/13/1999 12:16:00 PM
From: Ramsey Su	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9980

Ron and others, I was going to jump in but after re-reading Larry's post, it is obvious his opinion stems from ignorance. May be through your combined efforts, he would take the time to read up on a subject before formulating condemning opinions. Sadly, what the exchange demonstrated was how easily the masses can be manipulated via a few headlines, knowing that the reader (or viewer) would never bother to question the truth. Headlines such as "butcher of Tianamen" might have grabbed attention but the damage was never considered. I wonder how we would feel if the world only reference the US as the "butchers of Kent State" or the "murders of native Americans" or the "slave masters of the modern era"? Regarding Lee, I don't know the facts and I don't know his guilt or innocence but it really doesn't matter. If not for this guy, I am certain there are other "spies" floating around, trying to find what they can for China, Japan, Russia, Israel or whoever. Don't we have the same global network under CIA payroll? While it is most unlikely that if Lee had been Jewish, he would have receive the same treatment. Chinese bashing, at the moment, is a lot more fashionable than being called anti-sematic. The fact remains all countries engage in this cloak and dagger practice. Who is the pot and who is the kettle? As I am typing, CNN reports the Clinton administration is issuing strong warning for China to obey our laws. If China retaliates by rounding up a known US spy or two, which I am sure they are aware of, where would that leave our relations? As for human rights, I have opined that China has progressed miraculously. They should be the poster child for the UN Human Rights Commission. Everyone who has looked at the facts agreed. Back to more important issues. The course that we (US) have taken is going to lead to confrontation in all fronts. There are slippery banana issues against the EU, trade wars against China, Japan, all are not positive for the stock market. I hate it when politics interferes with my pocket book. Ramsey

To: Ron Bower who wrote (8286)	3/14/1999 10:52:00 PM
From: Liatris Spicata	Respond to of 9980

Ron- Yes, I gather there have been significant reforms in economic areas. Chinese still lack the most basic of political or human rights. The Chinese gov. appears of the opinion that they can maintain political control and stifle dissent while structuring their economy along semi-capitalistic lines. My entire point was about the lack of human or political rights in China, while I allowed for changes in material circumstances. Your list of economic changes is simply wide of the point. <<I recently read of a man winning monetary damages from the local government for being wrongfully detained - the official responsible was removed from his position.>> I find that interesting and new. I suspect this pushes the frontier in China and does not pertain to the national government. <<Particularly interesting were the years Premier Zhu Rongi spent 'down on the farm' being 're-educated'>> Not sure what relevance that has, although it may exercise a moderating influence. Deng's and Jaruselski's family experience might support that idea- but the former was in power during the Tienamen massacre. <<I recently read of some home owners suing a developer for not repairing shoddy workmanship - China has sent judges to the US to learn how to create the laws necessary for individual property rights.)>> I'm not one to minimize property rights. But again, you are failing to distinguish between economic rights and political ones- and it was political ones that my post addressed. When you say 'thugs', do you include Batista, Shah of Iran, Marcos, Hussein...>> This is a pretty odious group. <<Wen Ho Lee's firing 'implies' that he's guilty of treason, yet no evidence has been made public to support these implications>> Whatever can you be thinking? Suspicions have been aroused- that is enough to stimulate loss of access to classified info, as you well know. Legal guilt is an entirely different matter and is determined by entirely different folks. You suggestion that evidence has not been made public and therefore action is not indicated is laughable. Surely you understand many espionage cases are not even tried because of security concerns. Condemnation of human rights violations and other concerns should be put forth, but they should not foster alienation.>> I'm glad to see your concern for human rights. I don't think the matter can be raised publicly- and very often not privately- without risking alienation. It is a risk we should be prepared to run. <<I hope you don't mean to be as insulting as the comment indicates.>> No insult really intended. When I choose to insult, I'm usually direct. <<Would Dr. Tsien have been ousted if he were caucasion? In the early '50s there were many involved in the aerospace and nuclear programs that had 'extremist ideologies' according to Hoover's standards, but the non-caucasion was removed>> Hmm, I'm not sure what history you are referring to. Was Robert Oppenheimer was "non-caucasion"? Or Theodore Hall, who probably smuggled secrets from Los Alamos to the Soviets. I challenged you not to impugn the integrity and motives- by citing "racism"- of those who decided Wen Ho Lee represented a security risk unless you have grounds for that claim. I find your historical reference utterly unconvincing. Thanks for writing, Larry