Posted on 03/07/2007 5:07:38 AM PST by zook
Washington called President Chen Shui-bian's pledge to push for independence "unhelpful" Monday and reiterated its stance against independence for the island Beijing regards as a renegade province.
"As it is well-established, the U.S. does not support independence for Taiwan," State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said.
"President (George W.) Bush has repeatedly underscored his opposition to unilateral changes to the status quo by either Taipei or Beijing because this threatens regional peace and stability, U.S. national interests and Taiwan's own welfare," McCormack said.
He reminded that Chen had pledged in his 2000 and 2004 inaugurations to not declare independence, change the island state's name, or advocate other sovereignty themes.
"President Chen's fulfillment of his commitments is a test of leadership, dependability and statesmanship and of his ability to protect Taiwan's interests, its relations with others and to maintain peace and stability in the Strait," McCormack said.
"Rhetoric that could raise doubts about these commitments is unhelpful."
On Sunday Chen told a group of Taiwan independence advocates that "Taiwan wants independence, Taiwan wants to change its name, Taiwan wants a new constitution, Taiwan wants development."
Such rhetoric in the past has angered Beijing, and raised concerns in the United States, which has pledged to protect Taiwan from Chinese military aggression.
Why not?
The Left a/k/a Democrats applauded when the Communists killed milliones in VietNam and Camboda.
They applaud and wet their pants in glee each time an American Serviceman/woman is killed in Iraq or Afganistan.
So long as it is either Communists or outlaw muslims doing the killing and it is American Servicemen/women being killed, the Democrats are beside themselves with glee.
In 2006 ,aided and abetted by idiots and fools, the Demmocrats were able to begin the process of turning Iraq and Afganistan into another VietNam. With the same results.
WLR--I've already made all the substantive points I need to make. There's no longer any need to respond to either liars or people whose posts simply make no coherent sense.
In case you're curious, I put you in the latter category. Have a nice day.
And for those who keep denying how far China has come in granting political rights, who keep claiming that China is still the totalitarian prison camp of yesteryear, here's another FR thread revealing how the French are apparently going to crack down on free speech and press:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1797363/posts
I know more about history, human nature, China and Chinese social and political FACTS, and contemporary dynamics than all the myriad myths and ignorant perceptions you spin about history and China put together, in all your posts.
You understand nothing about political freedom, here or there, and you know zilch about the cost of the lack of that freedom, in human terms in contemporary China today.
You have a Shanghai mall shoppers view of political reality in China and you know nothing of the political-capital nexus and dictatorial basis on which it is being built - a basis in which there will be no political freedom in China as long as it stands.
You know nothing about the political and governmental machinery that ties all major "private" enterprise into the control of the dictatorship.
You know nothing of the censorship that precludes all modern journalism, foreign and domestic, from exposing the sham of privileges that are not rights and are only allowed, and will only be allowed, as long as they serve the dictatorship of the Communist Party in China.
Nothing I have said about China was or is false. Unlike you I know what I am talking about, and am not afraid to state the facts about contemporary China instead of the myths that you and many American corporate enterprises spin for the benefit of those in China who need those myths to persist.
On my next (24th) trip to China, I will be sharing your myths and misconceptions with my freedom-loving friends there so that they can have a good laugh at how little a modern American academic understands what is going on there.
When pressed to explain why the protest art and its artists disappeared two days later - after the public got the pretense it was permitted - zook said, yadda, yadda, yadda.
When pressed to explain why the apartment full of bibles was raided, and what happened to its residents, zook replied "well that's blah blah blah and blah blah blah blah blah."
When pressed to elaborate, zook stated that he thought "the new emperors clothes are just fabulous".
as zook stated, again and again, reality does not matter, I'm the zook (no kidding)
I want you to type out one statement of yours--just one--that you think is not either a lie or a gross misstatement of reality.
lie
lie
"I know more about history..."
You know nothing beyond the end of your nose. Your posts are full of lies and distortions. You appear to be a gratuitous warmonger. Not one thing you have said on this thread is true.
We are all less intelligent for having read your posts.
"Your posts are full of lies and distortions."
Instead of your myths, try to back up what you say with facts (you can't). Name one lie or distortion in any of my posts about China. You can't. But you can repeat your claim over and over as often as you want. It won't produce a fact.
I would have to retype all most posts on this thread, but why should I bother, you can re-read them and pick any individual statement you want.
Yes zookster, we are all less intelligent for having read your posts. But, we do now have a good collection of myths from you about freedom to tell our freedom-loving Chinese friends.
"You appear to be a gratuitous warmonger."
It is the weak and spineless that create wars, not the vigilant.
Communism is our new found friend.Haven't you heard?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.