Dragon or the Snake?
reading this article and others by Mr. Sascha Matuszak, one can only conclude
that he is only interested in smearing China, be it its government, its people,
its culture, its food, its anything. I wouldn't be so dismayed by his articles
if he were to give us more in-depth analysis or criticism of the Chinese phenomenon
resulting from the open-up policy of Deng Xiao-Ping. Instead all we read about
are petty things like people coughing up mucus in the morning or peasants putting
up their feet during train rides or how Chinese food is tricky! And it seems
like he wants to use any pretext or opportunity to show people his disgust with
China or its people.
Frankly, I think
he is a racist. Look at the outrageous claims that he makes:
the Chinese still locked in the ancient and ridiculous belief that outsiders
are dogs incapable of understanding the speech at the high court?"
today is crude and still very racist after years of anti-everybody communist
I am very disappointed
at Antiwar.com, an otherwise very informative forum, for hosting a column by
a racist like Mr. Matuszak.
(In spite of his
supposed years of stay in China, he still does not grasp what is meant by "Laowai."
It is not the equivalent of the "N-word." It is just a casual way
of referring to foreigners.)
~ Roger Chan
Your letter is
typical in that it leaves out any words of mine that might refute the claim
that I have "racist" tendencies and inflates every comment that agrees with
your premise. Here is one quote from my latest column, the one right before
I say that some Chinese are crude and racist:
is a complex country with more contradictions then you can shake a stick at.
Chinese have cultivated hospitality for thousands of years – there is a
poem describing almost every aspect of a guest's visit."
You may have missed
that one. The annoying thing for you must be the truth of both statements.
And you are flat
wrong when you say that laowai is only a "casual reference for a foreigner."
Of course it means "foreigner," but any one of us laowai who have walked
down any street outside of the French Concession in Shanghai knows full well
how many other meanings it has.
of China's "Opening Up" is extraordinary, and there are countless
GDP stats, glowing business reports, and other fine analyses of the economic
miracle. My job is to show the day-to-day reality. I am not racist, I just call
it how I see it. And if my column were labeled "An American in America" I am
sure I would be getting hate-mail from red-blooded Americans, too.
trickery and so much more could be avoided if China would just join us on the
world's stage as both the glorious Dragon it is, and the lowly Snake it and
all of us are, at some point or another. A bit of honesty, a bit of courage,
and so many problems are brushed away like so much chaff."
you for your response to my letter in Backtalk.
According to Norwegian
law professor Ståle Eskeland, the
U.S. claimed self-defense under UN rules (article 51 presumably). Another
law professor, Geir Ulfstein at Oslo University, says that the use of military
force demands a Security Council decision.
The ISAF states
on their Web site that they have a UN mandate. However, the resolutions (1368
do not mention or authorize the use of military force.
~ Rune Burdahl
Divorce the US Military
Clark's excellent piece on Europe neatly and rightly addressed the attempt by
European leaders to make Blair the first president of the European Union. Ireland,
a small player on the European stage, is in a unique position to stop Blair
getting the job. Ireland is the only country that is holding a referendum to
approve the new constitution that creates the job of president. If Ireland votes
"no" then there will not be a job for Blair. So we should all start working
for the no campaign immediately. People outside
Ireland can make their contribution by writing to Irish newspapers and politicians.
~ Brian Cluer
Congress won't deny Bush his war money, we can legally start today and tomorrow
to deny our tax money to Congress. First, craft for your household the tightest,
most self-denying budget you can stand (even if it means oatmeal and peanut-butter
sandwiches for all of 2008). Second, divert every cent of your available money
into tax-sheltered and tax-deferred vehicles; maximize contributions to all
401k plans; open IRAs for everyone eligible in your household; join an employer
health savings account; start educational savings accounts for all eligible
minor children, grandchildren, other relatives. Third, stop over-withholding
at work; if you normally get a tax refund, increase your number of exemptions
for payroll. This will pinch. It might even hurt. But how much are you really
willing to suffer to stop this government from killing in your name? If you're
not doing this or something even better, stop talking to me. I've had enough
of the professional Democrats and their hand-wringing! This can't wait until
November 2008 or January 2009, and certainly not until November 2012, '16, or
~ William K. Scattergood,
cut is VERY likely not related to government intervention.
There are three
reasons I believe this.
Time-Domain Reflectometry allows trained network operators to pinpoint with
a good amount of precision exactly where the cables were cut. So it is no mystery
to the technicians involved where the problem is physically located, even if
that information isn't being reported.
2. With redundancy
in satellite and copper connections, it isn't really feasible to covertly blacken
out an entire area of the world. The worst that could happen is things would
slow down. Highly sensitive military traffic can still be routed via satellites
for those actors who possess them. I believe Iran can likely be included in
3. Even if
we were able to reroute network traffic to a point that we control, it doesn't
matter. SSH and other private key encryption mechanisms ensure that no amount
of computing power in the known universe could decrypt that traffic. It would
be noise and nothing more. Believe me, the government will not be the first
to break Diffie-Helman
encryption. The Internet is much more of a threat to established governments
than even most of its fiercest devotees know. Math says "no." This is why
it's still illegal for citizens of the U.S. to export new encryption technologies
– the nanny state is behind on that battle and hates secrets.
That said, you're
not a "nutjobber" or conspiracy theorist. You're a damned fine journalist, and
a patriot (in the non-acronym sense of the word), though I miss the old photo.
I look forward to your column every week, so keep up the good work.
~ Alexander Saint
Croix, network support analyst, Office of Information Technology, University
your writing on Kosovo and the broader post-Yugoslav situation. While the defense
of Serbian sovereignty is certainly a legitimate perspective, hasn't it too
easily foundered within the role designated for it by the Western-dictated "script"
for the conflict, even when being "reasonable," trying to compromise
over autonomy, etc.?
It seems that
within the perceptual field engendered by the "script," any legitimate
position put forward by Serbs are almost stillborn, discounted as they perfectly
fit the expected role. No surprise, as the "script" was specifically
designed to counter the defense of Serb interests, whether in Kosovo, or the
rest of the Yugoslav states.
So to challenge/transcend
the "NATO consensus" script, it really must be drawn "outside its box," i.e.,
not through the defense of Serbian sovereignty, but drawing out issues which
clarify the true dynamics of the situation:
- The implications
of recognizing of a criminal/terrorist Kosovo leadership, along with UNMIK's
interference with bringing KLA war criminals-politicians to justice.
for the actual ethnic cleansing that happened in Kosovo, and NATO's criminal
responsibility for it, along with the KLA's intimidation/liquidation of alternative
- The foreseeable
future of an "independent" Kosovo: corrupt UNMIK-EU/Mafia rule,
with Bosnia as the model.
Within the script,
any reasoning which opposes "independence" for a 90 percent ethnic majority
is discounted, but all these issues are distinct from the (legitimate) issues
of Serbian sovereignty, and indeed question the "NATO consensus" script's true
outcome for the democratic rights of Kosovan Albanians.
In any case, I
look forward to reading more of your work on Yugoslavia and more, here on Antiwar.com,
and hopefully elsewhere.
~ CJ, USA
one big part of the problem is that the authorities in Belgrade have never come
out and said that the KLA is a terrorist organization (instead, they released
all of the jailed KLA, at Washington's insistence); that the KLA committed atrocities
against other Albanians as well as Serbs; that NATO's 1999 assault was illegal
and illegitimate; and that no outcome other than full reintegration of Kosovo
into Serbia's constitutional order would be acceptable (precisely what Franjo
Tudjman's Croatia argued for – and got – in Dayton, concerning its ethnic Serbs).
you listed – terrorism, crime, corruption, etc. – have actually been
brought up repeatedly, and to no avail. Imperial officials and the mainstream
media don't so much dismiss them as outright ignore them, and the Empire does
what it wants anyway. Meanwhile, the quislings running Serbia are so deathly
afraid of falling from Brussels' and Washington's grace, they are willing to
do anything to satisfy Empire's demands. And when they do protest and try to
defend themselves, it's usually a day late and a dollar short.