All comments are subject to moderation by eChinacities.com staff. Because we wish to encourage healthy and productive dialogue we ask that all comments remain polite, free of profanity or name calling, and relevant to the original post and subsequent discussion. Comments will not be deleted because of the viewpoints they express, only if the mode of expression itself is inappropriate.
Please login to add a comment. Click here to login immediately.
Guest 7816. I hope you read my reply to your excellent questions above. But I hope you will be mindful of the risk I am taking speaking as I do. You know, every time I go online to make the comments I have made, I worry that someone may be monitoring my comments. You see, I am talking about issues that can be vey dangerous here in China. I am talking about the ELEPHANT IN THE ROOOM, that no one wants to talk about: RULE OF LAW. Many Chinesee people, some because they are naive, others because they are using politics, think my comments about the RULE OF LAW is me tring to say that they should follow western law. They misunderstand what RULE OF LAW means. There is no reason why laws in China can not reflect Chinese culture. But once the law is made, that LAW RULES, culture doesn't RULE, politics doesn't RULE, not anything else RULES in a society that accepts the RULE of LAW. The young ladies would have been much more comfortable taking their painful stories to private dealings with police and courts, where victims are protected. Instead they had to involve themselves in public discussion where people were also airing their dirty laundry about Mr. Hale. The victimization of the young women gets lost in all the mess. Guest 7816, I would appreciate your consideration for what might be my bravery in trying so hard to speak of these dangerous issues. I understand why you have spoken so rudely because I give you the benifit of my doubts -- this is the internet where people often misunderstand each other. Please give me the benifit of your doubs. I am trying to do the right thing and avoid all the distractions that hides real issus and the victimization of those young women. And I would appreciate more such questions from yu and responses to my own questions.
Feb 04, 2013 15:10 Report Abuse
GUEST 7815. You have to be, you must be, purposefully looking for loopholes, are you? There is no way you could think from my comments that I am taking a "step down". And what things am I saying. I never said anything about anyone. I didn't write that post on China daily. I referred to the young women as unfortunately taking their case to the internet. I spoke about Mr. hale as an example of a man who over-reacted because he felt there was no justice -- I used to Restaurant owner's words to say that. I spoke of the hackers as also seeking vengeance like Mr. Hale did. I spoke of those who supported the hackers as another example of people support vengeance because they don't trust the Justice System. So, what are you referring to when you say "if I had known, I wouldn't be saying these things." What horrible things did I say? Your comments are just . . . well I don't want to say. It's as if you don't read very well. AND WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE that I did or didn't experience first hand anything that you may or may not have experiences? You are just no getting it. Although Aunt Agatha was only referring to Foreigners and she was speaking very condescendingly about the Chinese, she at least said "this impacts all of us." SO, why would i need to know anything specific about you or Mr. Hale, or the young women, or the hackers, or anyone in order to see taht the issue is no RULE OF LAW. AND YOU TOLD ME TO FOCUS ON THE ARTICLES. What you see in my comments is consistent reference to how the issue here is about RULE OF LAW. AGAIN, what difference does it make that I know anything about what happened in Dalian. My reply to your questions above was exactly what WATCHFUL described, I was giving you the benifit of the doubt about your questions - although I knew you were only asking them because you felt you had found a way to 'trap' me or something, to somehow throw my words back at me with your twist on them. I choose not to respond to your "smut", hoping that if I stroked your ego you might actually find a way to "step down" yourself and finally walk through a door to reason that I have been holding open for you for days now.
Feb 04, 2013 23:48 Report Abuse
Okay, here's a simple question: what matters most to you?
Feb 05, 2013 18:48 Report Abuse
Watchful . . . and what they are doing is a classic example of the negative effects of "uploading identity" I wish they would go and do a bit of research into what that means.
Feb 02, 2013 00:33 Report Abuse
Watchful. Oh my heavens, I wish I would have thought of what you said. I was at another site. I just got here and read your words. EXACTLY, EXACTLY, EXACTLY. It is only because these people in Dalian have inside knowldege about Mr. Hale that they make all this discussion and assumptions about Mr. Hale. And then, they think that what they add here on line somehow should change the value of the ORIGNAL ARTICLES, which were probably written to spark a discussion about justice not Mr. Hale. AND YES, Yes, clever you. THEY ALL LIVE IN DALIAN, or most of them clearly do. Why don't they meet up and get some of those big fuzzy pillows and have it all out about MR. Hale. I mean, some of them are threatening to stalk each and get violent when they meet in a bar. I remember when I first came to this site -- truth is I am not really much of a online poster, either . . . but when I see something that matters I like to try. Anyway, MeiMei posted the http address to the China Daily discussion and suggested I go there. She said "then you will see how important this is to us here in Dalian." As though such a thing could only happen in Dalian. Or as if Mr. Hale is the only silly man in the world. HE IS MERELY THE MOST IMPORTANT SILLY MAN TO THE FOLKS IN DALIAN. It is the background they know of in Dalian, that makes Mr. Hale a hot topic for them. They are being selfish to think the internet world is interested in what they think about Mr. Hale. Other people are interested in the issues refered to in the original article. Hahahaha, maybe I shouldn't try to be so patient. You seem to cut to the point better with a bit of anger. I guess I like to try and give people the benifit of my doubts and let them take their time about seeing reason.
Feb 02, 2013 00:15 Report Abuse
Some one has to say something reasonable here. Look at the question Guest2071172 just asked. Some of you angry people, why don't you offer an answer to that question. -- this solhacehabravida guy sounds perfectly reasonable. Many of you folks just want to wallow in gossip. -- There are many people, some at this site, and at two other sites I have visited asking the same questions he does: like the woman who asked "why didn't Mr. Hale just report the parked cars to the authoritites"; and another poster who was angry at Mr. Hale but he/she clearly understands the problem and wrote that Mr. Hale "would never have done what he did in his own country". Well, maybe he would have, put he/she seemed to understand that in his own country, which has a mature justice systm, Mr. Hale wouldn't have become so frustrated. -- the hackers and those who support the hackers and those talking about Mr. Hale on line are just as silly as the guy who scratched the cars. Good gooly, why can't you angry people see that? Solhacehabravida is being kinder than me; he tries to see that they are all looking for justice. -- and what difference does it make that Mr. Hale is a foreigner, except that Chinese people who have racial bias will now use this to be angry at all foreigners? And you westerner who waste your time talking about Mr. Hale, just help them do that. It is crazy. -- no matter if you are a good person or a bad person do you think you would get justice if people started talking about your personal life on the internet? What difference does it make if he is a good or bad person? The articles don't mention anything about that. --and so many of you writers prove him correct,solhacehabravida; when you react as you do, you prove him correct because it does take a lot of words to say a simple thing. -- what is up with people like the MeiMei, a person who doesn't seem to understand anything but says that focusing on the articles is ruining the discussion. I would love to sit down with her for five minutes and see if I could help her think clearly. - maybe she is the one who is using a name like solhacehabravida to pretend she is him and harrass him. It's all just crazy.
Feb 01, 2013 23:21 Report Abuse
I'm not nearly as certain, as some people are, about what are facts and what are rumours. And maybe the mixture of rumours and what might be facts is why the discussion has become pretty ugle at times. I just wonder what the writers of the articles intended. If only for the obvious fact that news websites offer a forum for people to comment, it seems reasonable to think that a common reason for publishing news is to create debate. What do you think, do you think that the people who wrote the original articles hoped to create a discussion obout justice or a discussion about Mr. Hale's personal life?
Feb 01, 2013 15:18 Report Abuse
This comes from an unrelated article: "Chinese law forbids hacking and any other actions that damage Internet security," the Defense Ministry said. The articles, about a man-who-scratched-some-cars, don't mention Mr. Hal's name or anything about his personal life, so it seems clear that those who wrote the articles were not trying to spark a discussion about Mr. Hale. I offer this quote above because I want to again ask the questions: what is the difference between what Mr. Hale did and the actions of those who "hacked" Mr. Hale's website? And don't you think it is lack of trust in the justice system that causes so many people to try and punish lawlessness with more lawlessness, as Mr. Hale did, as did those who "hacked" Mr. Hale's websites did? And why do people approve of crime as a punishment for crime? And don't you think that if people trusted the justice system they would not, so very very often, resort to 'trial' on the internet? It seems clear that people become fustrated with lawlessness, and over-react, when they don't trust the Justice System. That is the real issue.
Feb 01, 2013 16:50 Report Abuse
Again, my THREE QUESTIONS . . . . . . . . . Why do so many people in China not trust the police and courts and how can this problem be solved? Why do so many people in China think that another crime is good punishment for a first crime and how can that attitude be changed? Do you think the answer to the first two questions is related?
Jan 30, 2013 12:19 Report Abuse
Normally, I don't get involved in these discussion. It seem more like a man's passtime. But I have been reading about this story. -- the articles are not about Mr. Hale; although many people have twisted the articles into a discussion about Mr. Hale. NO matter if they support him or hate him is is all just distraction. What is wrong with you? Why are you getting angry when people try to focus on the articles? That is 250!
Feb 01, 2013 23:03 Report Abuse
I hope you finally see, now, that you folks have made the story a story about Mr. Hale. "This story" you say, is about Mr. Hale's "exact and unique" experience. The story is neither unique in China, where justice is weak and that causes people to over-react all the time, nor is it "exact" in any regard related to a man known to you folks as Mr. Hale. The story is incredible common and only exactly about Mr. Hale here online for you folks from Dalian, who have introduced 'smut' about his life, for you own purposes. Yet, you told me to focus on the article and that I was disrespecting the person who wrote the original article. Clearly, you told me that out of your own mistake in thinking that what you add here online changes the value of a REAL NEWS STORY. What you did was like the guy who said, about the restaurant owners insightful comment in the real article, "but Chinese people don't speak what they mean." There was no comment in the article about such an issue, and why stir up more racism and politics with with such speculation. There was a clear reference, from the restaurant owner, about how the unidentified man had a "point" but his reaction was over the top", making the story a story about how a man over-reacted because he felt justice was weak in China. I simply refused to follow you folks down the rabbit hole and refused to loose myself in details about Mr. Hale, details that are important to you folks, details that clearly aren't really NEW-WORTHY. When someone publishes a real news story about the details of Mr. Hale's life, outside the of online chatting, I promise you, if I am interested in that story I will be as diligent about sticking to the story as I have been in this case. But I probably won't be interested because there is no valuable issue to discuss in the details of Mr. Hale's life. And there is no interesting issue, beyond racial bias, in any story that suggests a "foreigners" silly actions are in some regard different from a story about any person's silly actions. All of this over-reaction when justice is weak are part of the same issue: the man who scratched the cars, the hackers, those who supported the hackers, and the 'trial' of Mr. Hale on line are all a result of weak power given to RULE OF LAW in China. But you folks who are keen to discuss the details of Mr. Hale's life are outside the issue . . . as others have suggested you might think about getting together in you local area to discuss your local interest in Mr. Hale - most likely, all the folks who are so vicious with each other online, would have a different tune when they met face to face. That sort of 'being such a negative someone else online' is the negative effect of what is called "identity uploading" where people often purposefully misunderstand each other. I like to think I am very patient with that sort of self-imposed blindness, because I know "it can take a grat many words to make a point in the world today." You have been rude and exceedingly evasive, something you would most likely not be in person. On the other hand, I have no apologies to make.
Feb 02, 2013 02:11 Report Abuse
REAL NEWS ARTICLES ARE RARELY ABOUT PEOPLE. They are almost always about issues. Many people seem to want to turn the focus of this article that mentions Mr. Hale into a bunch of gossip about Mr. Hale. Some because they don't like Mr. hale. Some because the are concered that there was not proper justice for his crime. I am not interested in talking about about Mr. hale. The articel is not abot Mr. Hale. But I am very interested in any comments about the Justice System and why people don't trust the Justice system in China. RIGHT, clearly the restaurant owner understood that Mr. Hale over-reacted because he, Mr. Hale, didn't trust the justice system in China. Really folks is this article about Mr. Hale? Should this thread and our comments really be about Mr. Hale. Is it really a place to gossip about Mr. Hale? Or is the article and shouldn't this thread be about crime and justice? Have my points which I repeated again and again with very little direct response really not focused on the issue referred to in the article? My THREE QUESTIONS above, they are exactly focused on the article, yes? These are very simple questions folks. I would appreciate some direct responses?
Jan 30, 2013 00:57 Report Abuse
I just received a number of replies to my "THREE QUESTIONS posted above, informing me that the article, about Mr. Hale scratching the cars, is actually an article about Mr. Hale. I have just been told that I am hijacking this discussion by focusing on the RULE of LAW in China. And I have been told that I am not respecting the writer of the artcle because I am not focusing on the article itself. Very clearly the article is about Justice in China. And that is an issue related to the RULE OF LAW in China. The article is clearly not about Mr. Hale. Mr. Hale is just the person mentioned. The article also mentions the restaurant owner; should we focus on him/her?
Jan 30, 2013 00:49 Report Abuse
if i knew how to send a private message i would, are you just traverling there? i just wana leave this job atm and have a year in china. ok well thanks for your help mate!!
Jan 30, 2013 01:07 Report Abuse
Alexander, I am going to write a fair bit here because, as I have said many times "it often takes a great many words to make a simple point." I hope that after you read my reply you will see just hopw simple my points are. And you might decide to applaud my patience and my concern for the society where I have settled down, married and made my home.
Jan 30, 2013 11:19 Report Abuse
Alexander I have simply tried to keep the discussion focus on "crime" and justice" and not on details of Mr. Hale's life, or on politics (foreigners vs Chinese). The root causes of, both, Mr. Hales over-reaction and the over-raction of those who have suggested that hacking Mr. Hale is justice are made clear by the restaurant owner who understood Mr. Hale's anger. That root cause is the lack of RULE by LAW in China. And that same lack of RULE by LAW in China is the reason why people have taken Mr. Hale to 'trial' on the intenet. And it is the same reason why people suggest that hacking Mr. Hale's websites is justice. People, normal citizens, get angry at crime but when they don't trust their own police and justice system they look for other forms of justice. THis is exactly what Mr. Hale did. His behavior is exactly the same as the the people who hacked his website and exactly the same as the people who approve of that hacking. .................................
Jan 30, 2013 11:24 Report Abuse
Alexander: Now, why did I write so much and so often. I have said very clearly, that "it often takes a great many words to make a simple point in our world today." This is the intenert, Alexander, people are used to 20 second blurbs and many say they want to have a serious discussion but many have other, negative, motivations. This is the internet where people come and act very confrontational. This is the internet where people feel much less responsibility for what they say then they would face to face. This is the internet where "thumbs up" thumbs down" sort of judgements about popularity are valued more than reason and patience. This is the internet where many people come to simply "upload identity", where they come with fixed ideas that are often political, idea which they have no intention of examining. Self-appraisal is not very popular on the internet. I have anticipated all this and I have written long and often because I care, and because someone has to try and see the real issues. Someone should try to do more with this article about a man's over-raction to crime. Somone should try to see the general problem, the social issue. I mean, surely the person who wrote the article was not just reporting on bad behavior. But, maybe I have too much faith in people.
Jan 30, 2013 11:27 Report Abuse
Alexander: I have a question for you, Alexander. Why would you make such assumptions about me? What you seem to think is my wrong doing, when you criticize the length and repetitiveness of my posts, I call simple patience, consistency, and real concern for the society where I have made my home. Perhaps you might consider that your assumptions about me are clear evidence of what you expect from the internet. The problem now, Alexander, is that without actually understanding what I have said you have added the weight of your comments to those made by the very people who have moved the focus of this thread away from the issues referred to in the article. I mean, do you really think the article is just about the stupid actions of a foreigner? Read the article. It is clearly about one man's over-reaction to what he thought was a crime, probably (as is so often the case in China) because he, either, tried more legitimate methods, or he simply doesn't trust the police or justice system. He is not alone in that lack of trust -- this lack of trust is a huge issue in China. So, if you do now understand me, Alexander, I would ask you to act responsibly and write another post indicating that you do now understand. I am not asking you to agree with me. I am not interested in winning. But if you do now understand why I have persisted in trying to focus this discussion on CRIME and JUSTICE and THE RULE OF LAW in China, then please say so. If you disagree with me, say why, that would be useful . . . but, please Alexander - with all due respect, stop adding weight to nonsense: that is really "spam".
Jan 30, 2013 11:33 Report Abuse
Alexander: you or others, will probably comment, again, on all the words I have used here. Just stick to the points I have made and there would be less reason for me to repeat myself. Sincerely, Alexander "it can take a great many words to make a simple point in our world today. As for what is meant by the RULE OF LAW. RULE OF LAW is not the same as laws. RULE OF LAW is a concept that is either accepted by a society or not. RULE OF LAW is one of the three fundamental concepts of all developed countries. President Obama spoke of this in his recent speach after being sworn in as President. I'm not American, by the way. And I am not trying to push RULE OF LAW on anyone. My point is very simple ( I am not promoting RULE OF LAW) I am merely saying that the reason why people don't trust their police and justice system in China, the reason why people over-react and use crime as punishment for crime is because there is no RULE OF LAW. I can't imagine that is such a complex point . . . but, again, it can take a great many word to make a simple point in our world today. This is especially difficult on the internet where getting "thumbs up" are more important. I'm a westerner, living in China. China is developing, following a policy of "opening up and learning from the west." Man, I'm just trying to do my bit. Why didn't you give me the benifit of your doubt, and applaud the patience I have shown with Chinese people who, though their leaders are familiar with my points, most Chinese people are not? Why didn't you applaud my efforts to address with patience and logic (and not too much anger) the comments from so many who were clearly attacking me and not the simple points I have made? Why make the assumptions you have?
Jan 30, 2013 11:43 Report Abuse
Alexander: What is it that you are struggling to make sense of? The article, about the man who scratched the cars, is clearly about an individual's over-reaction to a crime. It is about how he felt outraged by someone else's bad behavior/crime and then punished that crime with another crime. This point is made clear by the words from the Restaurant Owner who was quoted in the article. The restauraunt owner said Mr. Hale "had a point" but his reaction was over the top." But Mr. Hale is not the only one who over-reacts in this manner. He is not the only one who feels unable to do anything about bad behavior or crime and so they punish that crime with another crime. That fact is made clear by all the people commenting on here, and three other sites I have looked at, about stuff such as how it is "justice" that some other people "referred to as "Muslim Extremist" hacked Mr. Hale's website. This second crime, against Mr. Hale, has been called "justice" for Mr. Hale's crime. But why is it that so many people in China resort to lawlessness as a means of punishing other lawlessness? I have suggested this happens because people in China don't trust the police or the justice system. And this is not a new point. And this topic is all over the news, where many of the new leaders of China are promising to work at improving "justice" and reducing corruption. If you look at the comments (aside from all the comments that are simply rude or foreigner bashing or China bashing) you will see that many commenters are confused and upset because they don't know if Mr. Hale has been punished properly for his crime. They are confused because they don't trust the police or justice system. Look at the comments, please. People are worried that Mr. hale escaped justice by bribing some one or by using personal relationships (guanxi). Clearly it is relevent to discuss the issue of RULE OF LAW in China . Add your weight to that, and I will feel much less need to repeat myself and use "so many words to make a simple point."
Jan 30, 2013 11:46 Report Abuse
Ambivalentmace. YES, YES, YES . . . . But, I have to ask you, why you would choose to doubt the restaurant owner's words . . . sure he likely doesn't care very much . . . but that wasn't the point of the article. Stay focused man, stay focused. The article was about Crime and Justice . . . Sure it is good to expand a topic. But PLEASE PLEASE< folks comment on what is said before offering additional opinions. SO, Abvilentmace. DO YOU AGREE OR NOT: the restautrant owner, regardless of what hidden thoughts he might have, expressed his understanding for Mr. Hale's frustration at the lack of RULE OF LAW in China?
Jan 30, 2013 11:57 Report Abuse
Ambivalentmace. And why hasn't anyone commented on why it seems acceptable, in China, for a news article to refer to a person as foreigner. Now some might say that is racist. It may be racially motvated behavior but it isn't really racism because the concept of racism is poorly empowered here in China. So, we have to be patient. And that is one reason why I have tried to be patient, here, when discussing RULE OF LAW. Most people in China have no idea what this means. THEY WANT RULE OF LAW; that is why they get so frustrated and ever-react so often to crime and offer criminal revenge as justice. They want LAW and JUSTICE to RULE but they don't really know how to talk about the concept of RULE OF LAW.
Jan 30, 2013 12:01 Report Abuse
Ambivalentmace. Yes, and isn't that, everthing you have mentioned here also part of the big issue about lack of trust in the justice system, lack of trust generally. And you are actually placing my comments in a larger issue -- about how it is that so much of the policy and social engineering here in China confronts the real goals of normal people and flies in the face of modern thinking and logic. China is developing. SO, really, Ambivalent Mace . . . put your weight behind efforts to keep discussions on topic. And let's do everything we can as westerners living in a country that is "opening up and learning from the west." But, let's try to keep our language clean, okay. No criticism man . . . I mean, your language doesn't bother me or cause me to react. It's just, you know what happens when people use hyperbolic language like "don't give a shit"; that prompts other people to become angry. And in the world today, on the internet, people are already confrontational enough. Now, maybe it is your intenetion to confront . . . that's okay too. Hahahaha, but maybe you should choose a new screen name then. Confrontation is not very ambivalent. Now, I'm just trying to imput a bit of humour . . . so please don't get riled.
Jan 30, 2013 12:11 Report Abuse
Alexander, see man, you already got some "thumbs up" . . . and here I am collecting "thumbs down" from people who probably haven't understood the simple point I am making. Nor do they recognize that it might be the case that I am trying to do some good and not just win an argument. If they don't agree with me, it would be nice if they would explain why. BECAUSE, EVEN THOUGH THEY DISAGREED WITH ME, AT LEAST IF THEY EXPLAINED WHY WE WOULD ACTUALLY BE TALKING ABOUT THE REAL ISSUE.
Jan 30, 2013 12:15 Report Abuse
Sign up with Google
(
(