Thursday, April 14, 2011

MOFA commences The Hunt for the 34


It was all over the nets the other day and now made the news: Taiwan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) is going to probe the 34 signatories of the Open Letter to Ma Ying-jeou. Feeling a bit chilly? Read on....note the sick attack on Nat Bellocchi, implying he was somehow not right in the head:
Following the letter’s publication, some Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers, including Chiu Yi (邱毅), appeared on TV talk shows on Monday night and questioned whether the signatories were fully aware of the content of the letter.

Bruce Linghu (令狐榮達), head of the ministry’s Department of North American Affairs, said yesterday the ministry would contact each of the signatories to check if they initiated the petition themselves or just added their names to it, what their concerns were and what exactly they knew about the matter.

“We heard that Bellocchi seldom goes out nowadays and it is not so often that people have a chance to talk to him. It seems he has not been well recently. We are checking this out,” Linghu said.

Linghu said the ministry would make it clear to the signatories that the government’s decision to turn over the missing documents’ case to the Control Yuan for investigation was made based on the law and would ask them to respect Taiwan’s legal system.
.....
KMT Legislator John Chiang (蔣孝嚴) yesterday asked Hou to give him a copy of the original letter along with other open letters addressed to Ma by Bellocchi and others in recent years.


......

Chiang said he doubted the original letter was written in English, as the ministry has said.

“It’s a reasonable assumption that the letter was originally written in Chinese. [Bellocchi] had a written Chinese version in place and had others put their names on it. Their position has been clear, which is to attack the Ma Ying-jeou administration, accusing it of taking democracy a step backward, abusing political power and harboring political motives,” Chiang said.
The KMT plan is make it appear as though the letter is a nefarious plot of the DPP. But I am familiar with its history and can assure readers it was written in English and sent around to each of the signatories in that language. Not that you guys believe John Chiang anyway.

The instant reach for DPP-led conspiracy sheds light on the KMT reaction to the assassination attempt on Chen Shui-bian by a disgruntled Blue supporter. It seems a handy response to anything that places the KMT in a bad light.

Feelin' that chill? Yes, it's the apparent use of government organs to chill free speech in Taiwan by "investigating" people who speak in a way the government doesn't like. Scary. Hope the public is paying attention.
____________
Daily Links:
_______________________  
Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums! Delenda est, baby.

36 comments:

Anonymous said...

The KMT has always been a reactionary party.

Steven Crook said...

On the climate becoming bipolar... If anything, the last two winters down here in Tainan have been much wetter than usual. This spring, the cold weather lingered so long that crops planted in the expectation they'd ripen just before Tomb Sweeping Festival (when demand for fruits used in offerings rockets) didn't ripen in time, leaving farmers in the lurch. Just my personal observation and word on the street; no scientific data to back it up.

SW said...

All democratic nations should wake up to Ma hunting down 34, signifying a new reality: Chinese Communist Party and Chinese Nationalist Party have turned from mutual enemies to closest comrades. These two Lenin parties share a common hallucination - Chinese world domination.

STOP Ma said...

.
.
.
I still shake my head at how Chiu Yi STILL has a voice in anything.
.
.
.

Taiwanese said...

I as a Taiwanese want to thank the 34 scholars. I want to add that Chinese Nationalist Party and Chinese Communist Party were enemiese to each other but they are closest comrades now. It is because they share a common hallucination - Chinese World Domination.

OzSoapbox said...

I'm kinda of confused as to why they need to investigate it at all.

Does it matter who's criticisng them. Instead of addressing the cricitism the diversionary tactic appears to be 'who signed it?'

Who gives a shit.

'Please respect our legal system'.

Anyone would think the legal system (and government) of Taiwan was infallible.

What an insular country this makes Taiwan appear to be.

Anonymous said...

The whole thing is a non-issue. The govt makes some noises about investigating to sound good to voters, the 34 signers make some noises of complaint and in a few days, it moves off the front pages and is quietly forgotten.

The 34 should know that if you are not a citizen of Taiwan and you want to dabble in politics, you should keep a very low profile as it is illegal and always has been. If they don't like it then become citizens.

Anonymous said...

I am just afraid the cynical Taiwanese public has not been paying attention, will not pay attention until 3 months before the election, and that the DPP has not been keeping score and will not attack with the full laundry list of offenses the KMT has committed against justice, liberty, fairness and equality.

The DPP has been very poor in this regard. The KMT does so many appalling things within and election cycle and all the DPP wants to talk about is a Green Card.

Michael Turton said...

They are not "dabbling" and some of them ARE citizens.

TicoExpat said...

I amm not sure, Michael, that people will react to this issue with disgust.

First of all, those who remember the goings of the past era will react with fear, and try to make the issue go away, not deal with it. they have alrrady been molded into submission. This I believe is the majority.

Then there are the ones who benefit from the system, and are terrified of anything that rocks the boat. In this economic climate, they think this is the only way out.

Younger people might fuss, but they are too busy trying to make ends meet on 20K. Most are truly apathic and can't blame them.

As to DPP o other opposition representatives, will they be willing to step on s many toes as necessary for a few atogas? Dunno, have not done it in the past, would compromise many economic partnerships, don't think so.

Sorry for my pessimism, but it's what I think. The rich taiwanese are intoxicated with real estate pies in the sky, the poor are unable to look further than their next meal, and the middle class is hanging on to dear life by their nails. No time to deal with "details" as human rights, fredom of speech and such. And they have already been brainwashed Chen et al are a bunch of liars/corrupt/flavor of the month baddie.

Anonymous said...

They are not "dabbling" and some of them ARE citizens.

It was a political letter by people who are mostly not involved in the political scene in Taiwan, therefore dabbling is a correct description. That's by the by however. Any citizens won't have anything to worry about. Non-citizens knew full well before they signed it that what they were doing was potentially illegal so they shouldn't be surprised if they are investigated. Again, it's a non-issue. No ones rights are being infringed.

Anonymous said...

This is ''white hot terror'' part 2 ....2011 to 2050....get ready.

paranoia seems to infact both DPP and KMT here, but worst is KMT.... those 34 signees will be barred from travelling to Taiwan in future.... and those here now will be deported, including some well known professors.

Trevor, UK, Cornwall
Been there done that

OzSoapbox said...

Exactly.

Criticism is not dabbling.

Having an opinion is not dabbling.

Anonymous said...

Voter apathy had been engineered.

A Formosan said...

To we Taiwanese (or Formosan), the KMT government is a colonial government. Ma and his Gang (Bamboo Union) are imperialists who have been harshly exploiting Formosans. And they are determined to continue doing that.

Anonymous said...

Trevor in Cornwall UK notes:

sirs,

My exwife in Taipei read this editorial to me over the phone today and then faxed it to me....i have it now, want to see all text? let me know and can do... RE

CHINA POST editorial today by Joe Hung, 79 yrs old, in Taipei who is head of the Central News agency at same time and writes unsigned editorials for KMT-leanin​g CHINA POST really lays into Nat Bellochi today and all over letter signees....., TERRIBLE..​..someone must complain to the POST and the JOE HUNG


i have the text..want to see it
?

i am sure JOE HUNG wrote it....nasty nasty

unsigned lead editorial on EDIt page 4 FRIDAy

disgusting

Trevor, UK lad

Anonymous said...

http://www.chinapost.com.tw/editorial/

Anonymous said...

Editorial

by Joe Hung, unsigned

Updated Friday, April 15, 2011 10:59 am TWN, The China Post news staff

Anonymous said...

"This is ''white hot terror'' part 2 ....2011 to 2050....get ready."

Are you referring to UK's sneak attack and bombing of Libya?

Col Onial

Anonymous said...

trevor with add:

Senior journalist and former diplomat and current CNA chairman Joe Hung (洪健昭), 79, wrote the attack editorial today in the CHINA POST, page 4
KMT Chairman Lien Chan of the Kuomintang (KMT) praised Hung for “putting the records straight” and suggested that all people interesting in knowing more about Taiwan read his ecditorial.
The book launch was held at the headquarters of Central News Agency (CNA) in Taipei, where Hung is serving as chairman.
Hung, whose Chinese name is Hung Chien-chao, said the major driving force and inspirations for him to write the attack editorial against the 34 signess of the Nat Bellochi letter came fromLien Heng (1878-1936), grandfather of Lien Chan.

He said he has taken it as his solemn duty to attack all splittists.

JOE Hung earned his bachelor's degree in English Literature and Ph.D. in history from Georgetown University in Washington, District of Columbia.

He has 50 years experience as a journalist, including stints as CNA's foreign correspondent, chief at various overseas bureaus, vice president and president.

Hung also worked for other news organizations, including as a correspondent at United Press International news agency and has written editorials and commentaries at The China Post — the ***most authoritative and impartial*** English daily paper in Taiwan.

In addition to a brilliant journalism career, he served as the R.O.C government's representative to Italy.

Lien, who previously served KMT premier and vice president, said JOE Hung has been a most fastidious journalist and historian, adding, Hung has mastered both the English and Japanese language.

Hung's extensive experience covering current affairs and his untiring research into history enable him to attack all splittists.

Anonymous said...

Trevor dishes the dirt from UK re Joe Hung editorial today in CHINA POST, unsigned lead editorial, page 4, ex-wife dictated text to me over phone typing as fast as I can.... READ IT and WEEP

excerpts and paraphrase in parts

by ex-wifey in Taipei, [i still love her]

re: actual headline,

''OPEN LETTER IS POLITICAL PLOY
ON BEHALF OF SU TENG-CHANG''

***Hung basically says the LETTER TO EDITOR BY 34 PEOPLE is basically a ploy by Nat and friends to get rid of Tsai and get Su nominated as DPP pres candidate!

Hung states in editorial itself "this letter might be a ploy intended to beat Su's rival Tsai and may have been initiated by SU himself!!!! "at the urging of Su" -- JOE HUNG IS INSANE POSEE OF ONE!

[by Joe Hung, chairman, Central News Agency and occasional editorial writer for CHINA POST,
once a week he writes his crap there, always unsigned but fingerprints all over it]
UNSIGNED EDOTORIAL in CHINA POST
Friday April 15

text begins:

''NaT BELLOCHI and 33 others wrote a letter in
the Liberty Times and Taipei Times on Monday.
They want Ma to restrain himself from "using the
judicial system for political purposes'" so as to discredit
the DPP and its candidates for 2012 election...according to
their letter to the editor of both papers.

Let's make things clear first (JOE HUNG STATES VERY BOLDLY).
Bellochi is a consultant to the Liberty Times and has a column
in the Taipei Times too. BOth papers are owned by Lin Ron Sang,
for VP of the Control Yuan, who is a splittist. The OPEN LETTER
was bullshit, JOE HUNG OPINES.

One thing that is amazing to us is that NB does not understand....

As a strong DPP support, NB mayhave just availed himself of the chance
to oust the much hated HK-born mainland chinese Ma and end a
brief 4 year KMT pause in Taiwan history. Although Nat might'be the initiator
of this SUPPORT SU action and GET RID OF TSAI at same time,
he should consider his actions carefully. [OR ELSE!] Bellochi's goal along with the other 33 signees seems
to be to try to interfere in our 2012 presidential elections.
'
QuOTE UNQUOTE online tomorrow on Saturday at Post website

www.chinapost.com.tw

[trevor signs off, thanks ex-wifey Jennier Lai in Taipei]

Anonymous said...

excerpts and paraphrase in parts

by ex-wifey in Taipei, [i still love her]

re: actual headline,

''OPEN LETTER IS POLITICAL PLOY
ON BEHALF OF SU TENG-CHANG''

***Hung basically says the LETTER TO EDITOR BY 34 PEOPLE is basically a ploy by Nat and friends to get rid of Tsai and get Su nominated as DPP pres candidate!

Hung states in editorial itself "this letter might be a ploy intended to beat Su's rival Tsai and may have been initiated by SU himself!!!! "at the urging of Su" -- JOE HUNG IS INSANE POSEE OF ONE!

[by Joe Hung, chairman, Central News Agency and occasional editorial writer for CHINA POST,
once a week he writes his crap there, always unsigned but fingerprints all over it]
UNSIGNED EDOTORIAL in CHINA POST
Friday April 15

text begins:

''NaT BELLOCHI and 33 others wrote a letter in
the Liberty Times and Taipei Times on Monday.
They want Ma to restrain himself from "using the
judicial system for political purposes'" so as to discredit
the DPP and its candidates for 2012 election...according to
their letter to the editor of both papers.

Let's make things clear first (JOE HUNG STATES VERY BOLDLY).
Bellochi is a consultant to the Liberty Times and has a column
in the Taipei Times too. BOth papers are owned by Lin Ron Sang,
for VP of the Control Yuan, who is a splittist. The OPEN LETTER
was bullshit, JOE HUNG OPINES.

One thing that is amazing to us is that NB does not understand....

As a strong DPP support, NB mayhave just availed himself of the chance
to oust the much hated HK-born mainland chinese Ma and end a
brief 4 year KMT pause in Taiwan history. Although Nat might'be the initiator
of this SUPPORT SU action and GET RID OF TSAI at same time,
he should consider his actions carefully. [OR ELSE!] Bellochi's goal along with the other 33 signees seems
to be to try to interfere in our 2012 presidential elections.

QuOTE UNQUOTE online tomorrow on Saturday at Post website

www.chinapost.com.tw

Anonymous said...

Trevor in UK Cornwall all nighter no sleep says:

[add]

[MORE from JOE HUNG editorial attaching Nat Bellochi et all 34]

QUOTE

"The discrepancy in the form of the two nouns used in the OPEN LETTER
seems to indicate that its writer or writers must be AMATEURS rather than
political pundits like Bellochi, who should have taken the lead to write it
at the very least. We understand he is championing the DPP cause but why
did he single out SU when the ex-premier is running neck and neck ith the DPP chairwoman
in the DPP primary?"

JOE HUNG IN PARANOIA FIT SUSPECTS NAT Bellechio ET ALL WROTE
THEIR LETTER AS ''A POLITICAL PLOY'' TO PUSH TSAI ASIDE, AND WAS WRITTEN
MAYBE ''AT SU'S BEHEST''. AND THAT LETTER WAS ''SET UP BY SU''...with ''expat patsies''
doing his bidding. O THAT JOE HUNG

Anonymous said...

Trevor up all night says and adds

One of the ''MOFA 34'' tells me in transatlnatic email via courrier pigeon:

''dear Trev
MOFA has ordered its people to interview all of the signees and ask them questins about the authenticity of the letter. I am waiting for my turn.
Don't you love the KMT of Jiang Kai-shek and Chen Yi?''

D said...

@Anon 10:04
"Non-citizens knew full well before they signed it that what they were doing was potentially illegal..."

What exactly is illegal here? How could an "open letter" be illegal? Can't anyone send an "open letter" to anyone? What do you mean?

Anonymous said...

Trevor canna type worth beans here is the whole enchilaada: color me deep green in far north!

Barry

re:


full Joe Hung unsigned editorial in CHINA PATSY on FRIDAY

Open letter is political ploy on behalf of Su Tseng-chang


Saturday, April 16, 2011
by The China Post news staff, aka Joe Hung, 80 years old

text as follows

Nat Bellocchi, a former chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan (AIT), and an impressive number of academics and writers from the United States, Canada, Europe and Australia published an open letter to President Ma Ying-jeou in the Taipei Times and the Liberty Times on Monday. They want Ma to restrain himself from "using the judicial system for political purposes" so as to discredit the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and its candidates for next year's presidential election.
Let's make things clear first. Bellocchi is a consultant to the vernacular Liberty Times and keeps an off-and-on column in the English-language Taipei Times. Both papers are owned by Lin Rung San, a former vice president of the Control Yuan who is an strong advocate of Taiwanese independence. They are considered the unofficial mouthpiece of the opposition party. The open letter, printed by no other leading newspapers in town, expressed the concerns of these academics and writers, including Bellochi who must regard himself as one of the latter, about an ongoing investigation by the Control Yuan of 17 luminaries accused of failing to return some 36,000 documents to the national archives.

One thing that is amazing to us is that Bellocchi, who had been American ambassador to Botswana and a deputy assistant secretary of state before his appointment by U.S. President Bill Clinton as AIT chairman, does not understand that a Control Yuan investigation does not necessarily lead to criminal prosecution. If our ombudsmen should find that the former DDP government officials, including ex-Premier Su Tseng-chang who may be the party's standard bearer against Ma in March 2012, violated the National Archives Act, they might be referred to public prosecutors for criminal investigation, which of course might lead to indictments and trials thereafter.


Bellocchi and company wrote they were disquieted by the timing of the announcement by a spokesman for President Ma regarding the Control Yuan investigation. It came one day before Su declared his candidacy in the "DPP presidential primary," they went on, albeit that primary was described as "the primaries for next year's presidential elections," which they should have written as presidential election, in the singular tense. "Su will undoubtedly play an important role in the upcoming presidential elections, either as a candidate himself or as a supporter of the eventual candidate," they pointed out, adding: "Announcing an investigation of him and the others at this time certainly gives the

Anonymous said...

Bellocchi and company wrote they were disquieted by the timing of the announcement by a spokesman for President Ma regarding the Control Yuan investigation. It came one day before Su declared his candidacy in the "DPP presidential primary," they went on, albeit that primary was described as "the primaries for next year's presidential elections," which they should have written as presidential election, in the singular tense. "Su will undoubtedly play an important role in the upcoming presidential elections, either as a candidate himself or as a supporter of the eventual candidate," they pointed out, adding: "Announcing an investigation of him and the others at this time certainly gives the impression of a political ploy intended to discredit the DPP and its candidates." The last word, "candidate," should also be in the singular, because neither of the two others candidates in the primary were charged with violating the law. They are Tsai Ing-wen, DPP chairwoman who is currently on leave of absence from her post, and Hsu Hsin-liang, a former DPP chairman. Only one of these candidates shall be fielded by the opposition party. They are not being investigated, while none of the rest of the 17 politicians under investigation are taking part in the race for nomination for president.

All co-writers of the open letter style themselves as observers of political developments in Taiwan for many decades and believe that the charges brought against Su et al "are politically motivated." Therefore they urge Ma, who is forbidden by law to interfere with the independence of the judiciary, to "refrain from using the judicial system for political purposes."

The discrepancy in the form of the two nouns used in the letter seems to indicate that its writer or writers must be amateurs rather than political pundits like Bellocchi, who should have taken the lead to write it at the very least. We understand he is championing the DPP cause, but why did he single Su out when the ex-premier is running neck-and-neck with the DPP chairwoman in the primary? Isn't it possible that the publication of the open letter at this time "certainly gives the impression of a political ploy intended to" beat Su's rival? If so, it stands to reason that the letter may have been published at the urging of Su.

 Or as a strong supporter of the DPP, Bellocchi may have just availed himself of the opportunity that presented itself to help whoever will be running come next March, to oust the hated Hong Kong-born mainland Chinese Ma and end a brief four-year Kuomintang interregnum. Although the former AIT chairman, who now owns a management consulting company, may be the initiator of the political ploy, he should consider his actions carefully. Ma wouldn't be the leader the people of Taiwan deserve if he didn't "refrain from using the judicial system for political purposes." Bellocchi's goal seems to be to try to interfere in our 2012 presidential election.



Copyright © 1911 – 2011 The China Patsy.
Back to the truth!

Anonymous said...

http://www.chinapost.com.tw/print/298807.htm

it's online now, oh the stupidity!

Anonymous said...

Amnesty International uses signature drives all the time to put foreign governments on notices over abuses of power. The target governments don't like it, and it is political in trying to get governments to observe social justice. This mode of criticizing governments is nothing novel or unprecedented.

Beijing lashes out over this type of complaint all the time, yet I have never seen the CCP publicly investigate the signatories.

Anonymous said...

A Formosan said...
"To we Taiwanese (or Formosan), the KMT government is a colonial government. Ma and his Gang (Bamboo Union) are imperialists who have been harshly exploiting Formosans. And they are determined to continue doing that.

3:38 PM"

to we amis, all those coming from hokkien and all mainlander are colonizers.
they are all palang!

Anonymous said...

MOFA 34 + Michael + Trevor = MOFA 36. The number of world population targeted by Taiwan's MOFA is increasing.

Anonymous said...

@D

non-citizens are not legally allowed to engage in politics here. The letter is quite obviously engaging in politics.

Michael Turton said...


non-citizens are not legally allowed to engage in politics here. The letter is quite obviously engaging in politics.


Non-citizens ARE allowed to engage in politics here. There are certain things they are not allowed to do, such as run for office or lead political demonstrations, though they certainly may participate.

In any case the issue isn't that these people are foreigners but they are engaging in speech the KMT doesn't like. Note that MOFA never investigates foreigners for saying the KMT has Taiwan on the right track, though they are engaging in politics too.

Really, this is too obvious and further trolling from you on this matter will be blocked.

Michael

Anonymous said...

Nothing hurts the KMT more than the truth. Keep hitting them where it hurts!!

Anonymous said...

Uh, Trevor, just one thing with your "crusade" against Joe Hung's editorial. All editorials in that paper are "unsigned." Come to think of it, pretty much all editorials in newspapers are "unsigned."

CY

Anonymous said...

Uh, @CY, re

[Uh, Trevor, just one thing with your "crusade" against Joe Hung's editorial. All editorials in that paper are "unsigned." Come to think of it, pretty much all editorials in newspapers are "unsigned." ]

Uh, CY, , just one thing with your "crusade" against my crusade against 79 yaer old Joe Hung's assinine -- maybe assi''ten'' not 9-- editorial. All left side of the page editorials in the CHINA PEST are "unsigned." Come to think of it, pretty much all editorials in ALL newspapers are "unsigned."

Good point. And WHY are they unsigned and WHO writes them. We know that Joe Hung one a week, while other Post staffers takes their turns writing them on a daily basis. One is from H Kong, one is from Macaco, one is from Russia, one is from Manila. None of them can write English! And they are all paid stoogies for the KMT.

But true, CY, unsigned editorials are a longtime journo tradition from UK to USA to Taiwan. But that does not mean that we do not KNOW who wrote the Mofa 34 editorial. It has HUNG's fingerprint on every word. And HUNG is head of the CNA! Isnt there a conflict of interest there, and shouldnt he be outed?