BBC reported that an escaped prisoner, Chen Guangcheng, is hiding in
the US embassy in Beijing.
The BBC report said: "Chen Guangcheng is in the US embassy in Beijing
following his dramatic escape from house arrest. Mr Chen is under "US
protection" ..."
Wao liao. This is exciting...like Hollywood movie...
Anyone know, under international laws, whether or not an embassy can
be legitimately used as a hiding place ...for the protection of an
escaped convict.
What happened, if China used the PLA to storm the US embassy ...to
recapture the escaped convict ?
In the meanwhile....the US ambassador is denying harbouring Chen, the
escaped prisioner. When asked by journalist whether Chen is hiding in
the US embassy, he answer repeatedly...No comment. Obviously, he
knows that the US embassy cannot be used as a hiding place for any
escaped convict.
> BBC reported that an escaped prisoner, Chen Guangcheng, is hiding in
> the US embassy in Beijing.
> The BBC report said: "Chen Guangcheng is in the US embassy in Beijing
> following his dramatic escape from house arrest. Mr Chen is under "US
> protection" ..."
> Wao liao. This is exciting...like Hollywood movie...
> Anyone know, under international laws, whether or not an embassy can
> be legitimately used as a hiding place ...for the protection of an
> escaped convict.
> What happened, if China used the PLA to storm the US embassy ...to
> recapture the escaped convict ?
> In the meanwhile....the US ambassador is denying harbouring Chen, the
> escaped prisioner. When asked by journalist whether Chen is hiding in
> the US embassy, he answer repeatedly...No comment. Obviously, he
> knows that the US embassy cannot be used as a hiding place for any
> escaped convict.
By international law, the U.S. embassy, consulates, ARE part of the
U.S. An attack on the embassy/consulate is an attack on the U.S.
itself.
Technically, this was an attack on China. Of course, the U.S. can get
away with it because the U.S. has the biggest and more numerous
weapons than China, as with wars in Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan,
Pakistan, Iran,...
U.S. bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
US bombing of an embassy of the People's Republic of China in Belgrade
Location Belgrade, Serbia, Yugoslavia
Date May 7, 1999
Target Disputed
Attack type Aerial bombing
Deaths 3
Injured 20
Perpetrators United States
[hide] v t e
1999 NATO bombing
of Yugoslavia
Grdelica Ðakovica Radio Television Serbia Belgrade streets Lu¾ane Ni¹
Novi Sad Valjevo Chinese embassy Kori¹a
On May 7, 1999, during the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia (Operation
Allied Force), five US JDAM bombs hit the People's Republic of China
embassy in the Belgrade district of New Belgrade, killing three
Chinese reporters and outraging the Chinese public. President Bill
Clinton later apologized for the bombing, stating it was accidental.
[1] Central Intelligence Agency director George Tenet testified before
a congressional committee that the bombing was the only one in the
campaign organized and directed by his agency.[2][3] The Chinese
government maintains that the bombing was a deliberate act[4] and has
always regarded the entire Kosovo operation as an illegal war by NATO.
[5]
>BBC reported that an escaped prisoner, Chen Guangcheng, is hiding in
>the US embassy in Beijing.
>The BBC report said: "Chen Guangcheng is in the US embassy in Beijing
>following his dramatic escape from house arrest. Mr Chen is under "US
>protection" ..."
>Wao liao. This is exciting...like Hollywood movie...
>Anyone know, under international laws, whether or not an embassy can
>be legitimately used as a hiding place ...for the protection of an
>escaped convict.
>What happened, if China used the PLA to storm the US embassy ...to
>recapture the escaped convict ?
>In the meanwhile....the US ambassador is denying harbouring Chen, the
>escaped prisioner. When asked by journalist whether Chen is hiding in
>the US embassy, he answer repeatedly...No comment. Obviously, he
>knows that the US embassy cannot be used as a hiding place for any
>escaped convict.
> > BBC reported that an escaped prisoner, Chen Guangcheng, is hiding in
> > the US embassy in Beijing.
> > The BBC report said: "Chen Guangcheng is in the US embassy in Beijing
> > following his dramatic escape from house arrest. Mr Chen is under "US
> > protection" ..."
> > Wao liao. This is exciting...like Hollywood movie...
> > Anyone know, under international laws, whether or not an embassy can
> > be legitimately used as a hiding place ...for the protection of an
> > escaped convict.
> > What happened, if China used the PLA to storm the US embassy ...to
> > recapture the escaped convict ?
> > In the meanwhile....the US ambassador is denying harbouring Chen, the
> > escaped prisioner. When asked by journalist whether Chen is hiding in
> > the US embassy, he answer repeatedly...No comment. Obviously, he
> > knows that the US embassy cannot be used as a hiding place for any
> > escaped convict.
> By international law, the U.S. embassy, consulates, ARE part of the
> U.S. An attack on the embassy/consulate is an attack on the U.S.
> itself.
> Technically, this was an attack on China. Of course, the U.S. can get
> away with it because the U.S. has the biggest and more numerous
> weapons than China, as with wars in Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan,
> Pakistan, Iran,...
> U.S. bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade
> From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> US bombing of an embassy of the People's Republic of China in Belgrade
> Location Belgrade, Serbia, Yugoslavia
> Date May 7, 1999
> Target Disputed
> Attack type Aerial bombing
> Deaths 3
> Injured 20
> Perpetrators United States
> [hide] v t e
> 1999 NATO bombing
> of Yugoslavia
> Grdelica Ðakovica Radio Television Serbia Belgrade streets Lu¾ane Ni¹
> Novi Sad Valjevo Chinese embassy Kori¹a
> On May 7, 1999, during the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia (Operation
> Allied Force), five US JDAM bombs hit the People's Republic of China
> embassy in the Belgrade district of New Belgrade, killing three
> Chinese reporters and outraging the Chinese public. President Bill
> Clinton later apologized for the bombing, stating it was accidental.
*> [1] Central Intelligence Agency director George Tenet
--------------------------------------------------------
* testified before a congressional committee that the bombing
-------------------------------------------------------------
* was the only one in the campaign organized and directed by
------------------------------------------------------------
* his agency.[2][3]
-------------
So you can say;
"The CIA planned it. The CIA directed it. The CIA wanted it done.
And the CIA did it."
> The Chinese
> government maintains that the bombing was a deliberate act[4] and has
> always regarded the entire Kosovo operation as an illegal war by NATO.
> [5]
Discussion subject changed to "Can the US embassy in Beijing be used ...to hide escape prisoner ? What if stormed the US embassy to recapture the escaped convict ?" by baldeagle
> > BBC reported that an escaped prisoner, Chen Guangcheng, is hiding in
> > the US embassy in Beijing.
> > The BBC report said: "Chen Guangcheng is in the US embassy in Beijing
> > following his dramatic escape from house arrest. Mr Chen is under "US
> > protection" ..."
> > Wao liao. This is exciting...like Hollywood movie...
.> > Anyone know, under international laws, whether or not an
.> > embassy can be legitimately used as a hiding place ...
.> By international law, the U.S. embassy, consulates, ARE part of the
.> U.S. An attack on the embassy/consulate is an attack on the U.S.
.> itself.
Yes. I am aware of this legal protection for the embassy...but ....
The question is, despite the embassy being granted the
status as "a part of the USA"...does the law explicitly give
the US ambassador in Beijing... the right to use the Beijing
embassy for activities against China...eg. use it as a base
for launching a missile targeting the China leaders...
.> > What happened, if China used the PLA to storm the US embassy
.> > to recapture the escaped convict ?
.> > Technically, this was an attack on China. Of course, the U.S.
,< > can get away with it because the U.S. has the biggest and more
.> > numerous weapons than China,
So, using the attack on the Chinese Embassy Belgrade as
a precedent, the PLA could storm the US embassy in Beijing
to recapture the escaped prisoner?
Of course, China did not have the biggest weapon nor more
numerous weapons than the USA. (the US has the largest
nuclear arsenal in the world)
For this reason, China must not storm the US embassy...unless
she is prepared for the consequences.
Wonder what the USA will do, if the PLA storm the US embassy
in Beijing. Launch an invasion of China...like Mc Arthur ?
>> > BBC reported that an escaped prisoner, Chen Guangcheng, is hiding in
>> > the US embassy in Beijing.
>> > The BBC report said: "Chen Guangcheng is in the US embassy in Beijing
>> > following his dramatic escape from house arrest. Mr Chen is under "US
>> > protection" ..."
>> > Wao liao. This is exciting...like Hollywood movie...
>> > Anyone know, under international laws, whether or not an embassy can
>> > be legitimately used as a hiding place ...for the protection of an
>> > escaped convict.
>> > What happened, if China used the PLA to storm the US embassy ...to
>> > recapture the escaped convict ?
>> > In the meanwhile....the US ambassador is denying harbouring Chen, the
>> > escaped prisioner. When asked by journalist whether Chen is hiding in
>> > the US embassy, he answer repeatedly...No comment. Obviously, he
>> > knows that the US embassy cannot be used as a hiding place for any
>> > escaped convict.
>> By international law, the U.S. embassy, consulates, ARE part of the
>> U.S. An attack on the embassy/consulate is an attack on the U.S.
>> itself.
>> Technically, this was an attack on China. Of course, the U.S. can get
>> away with it because the U.S. has the biggest and more numerous
>> weapons than China, as with wars in Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan,
>> Pakistan, Iran,...
>> U.S. bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade
>> From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
>> US bombing of an embassy of the People's Republic of China in Belgrade
>> Location Belgrade, Serbia, Yugoslavia
>> Date May 7, 1999
>> Target Disputed
>> Attack type Aerial bombing
>> Deaths 3
>> Injured 20
>> Perpetrators United States
>> [hide] v t e
>> 1999 NATO bombing
>> of Yugoslavia
>> Grdelica Ðakovica Radio Television Serbia Belgrade streets Lu¾ane Ni¹
>> Novi Sad Valjevo Chinese embassy Kori¹a
>> On May 7, 1999, during the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia (Operation
>> Allied Force), five US JDAM bombs hit the People's Republic of China
>> embassy in the Belgrade district of New Belgrade, killing three
>> Chinese reporters and outraging the Chinese public. President Bill
>> Clinton later apologized for the bombing, stating it was accidental.
>*> [1] Central Intelligence Agency director George Tenet
>--------------------------------------------------------
>* testified before a congressional committee that the bombing
>-------------------------------------------------------------
>* was the only one in the campaign organized and directed by
>------------------------------------------------------------
>* his agency.[2][3]
>-------------
>So you can say;
>"The CIA planned it. The CIA directed it. The CIA wanted it done.
>And the CIA did it."
>> The Chinese
>> government maintains that the bombing was a deliberate act[4] and has
>> always regarded the entire Kosovo operation as an illegal war by NATO.
>> [5]
Discussion subject changed to "Can the US embassy in Beijing be used ...to hide escape prisoner ? What if stormed the US embassy to recapture the escaped convict ?" by rst0
> > > BBC reported that an escaped prisoner, Chen Guangcheng, is hiding in
> > > the US embassy in Beijing.
> > > The BBC report said: "Chen Guangcheng is in the US embassy in Beijing
> > > following his dramatic escape from house arrest. Mr Chen is under "US
> > > protection" ..."
> > > Wao liao. This is exciting...like Hollywood movie...
> .> > Anyone know, under international laws, whether or not an
> .> > embassy can be legitimately used as a hiding place ...
> .> By international law, the U.S. embassy, consulates, ARE part of the
> .> U.S. An attack on the embassy/consulate is an attack on the U.S.
> .> itself.
> Yes. I am aware of this legal protection for the embassy...but ....
> The question is, despite the embassy being granted the
> status as "a part of the USA"...does the law explicitly give
> the US ambassador in Beijing... the right to use the Beijing
> embassy for activities against China...eg. use it as a base
> for launching a missile targeting the China leaders...
> .> > What happened, if China used the PLA to storm the US embassy
> .> > to recapture the escaped convict ?
> .> > Technically, this was an attack on China. Of course, the U.S.
> ,< > can get away with it because the U.S. has the biggest and more
> .> > numerous weapons than China,
> So, using the attack on the Chinese Embassy Belgrade as
> a precedent, the PLA could storm the US embassy in Beijing
> to recapture the escaped prisoner?
Is this little man worth that kind of price? No. As a matter of
fact, let him leave China, and let him find out how tough it is to
make a living in the West.
> > > > BBC reported that an escaped prisoner, Chen Guangcheng, is hiding in
> > > > the US embassy in Beijing.
> > > > The BBC report said: "Chen Guangcheng is in the US embassy in Beijing
> > > > following his dramatic escape from house arrest. Mr Chen is under "US
> > > > protection" ..."
> > > > Wao liao. This is exciting...like Hollywood movie...
> > .> > Anyone know, under international laws, whether or not an
> > .> > embassy can be legitimately used as a hiding place ...
> > .> By international law, the U.S. embassy, consulates, ARE part of the
> > .> U.S. An attack on the embassy/consulate is an attack on the U.S.
> > .> itself.
> > Yes. I am aware of this legal protection for the embassy...but ....
> > The question is, despite the embassy being granted the
> > status as "a part of the USA"...does the law explicitly give
> > the US ambassador in Beijing... the right to use the Beijing
> > embassy for activities against China...eg. use it as a base
> > for launching a missile targeting the China leaders...
> > .> > What happened, if China used the PLA to storm the US embassy
> > .> > to recapture the escaped convict ?
> > .> > Technically, this was an attack on China. Of course, the U.S.
> > ,< > can get away with it because the U.S. has the biggest and more
> > .> > numerous weapons than China,
> > So, using the attack on the Chinese Embassy Belgrade as
> > a precedent, the PLA could storm the US embassy in Beijing
> > to recapture the escaped prisoner?
.> Is this little man worth that kind of price?
No....but it involves a basic principle.
What if the USA use its embassy in Beijing ...not only to
habour escape prisoner...but to use it as a base to
launch a missile(or drone) to kill all Chinese top leaders
during a cabinet meeting.
Does...the embassy regarded as part of USA, give it legality
to carry out such activities against China ?
On Apr 28, 7:13 pm, baldeagle <force....@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Apr 29, 9:14 am, rst0 <rst0w...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> .> Is this little man worth that kind of price?
> No....but it involves a basic principle.
> What if the USA use its embassy in Beijing ...not only to
> habour escape prisoner...but to use it as a base to
> launch a missile(or drone) to kill all Chinese top leaders
> during a cabinet meeting.
> Does...the embassy regarded as part of USA, give it legality
> to carry out such activities against China ?
It takes a lot more than a building to launch an attack anywhere.
But if they really plan such an attack, it can be done. But you know
those people inside the building are dead ducks.
> On Apr 28, 7:13 pm, baldeagle <force....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Apr 29, 9:14 am, rst0 <rst0w...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > .> Is this little man worth that kind of price?
> > No....but it involves a basic principle.
> > What if the USA use its embassy in Beijing ...not only to
> > habour escape prisoner...but to use it as a base to
> > launch a missile(or drone) to kill all Chinese top leaders
> > during a cabinet meeting.
> > Does...the embassy regarded as part of USA, give it legality
> > to carry out such activities against China ?
> It takes a lot more than a building to launch an attack anywhere.
> But if they really plan such an attack, it can be done. But you know
> those people inside the building are dead ducks.
True.... it takes much more resources and organization
to launch such an attack.
The point, I am trying to establish is...whether or not
under the international law, the US embassy in Beijing
could be used for activities against China, including
mounting covert regime change activities.
On a sunny day (Sun, 29 Apr 2012 02:56:35 -0700 (PDT)) it happened baldeagle
<force....@gmail.com> wrote in
<56763c02-ec47-44ac-96fa-f170b4fc0...@qg3g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>:
>True.... it takes much more resources and organization
>to launch such an attack.
>The point, I am trying to establish is...whether or not
>under the international law, the US embassy in Beijing
>could be used for activities against China, including
>mounting covert regime change activities.
There is only ONE International Galactic law:
The Right Of The Strongest
On Apr 29, 6:15 pm, Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On a sunny day (Sun, 29 Apr 2012 02:56:35 -0700 (PDT)) it happened baldeagle
> <force....@gmail.com> wrote in
> <56763c02-ec47-44ac-96fa-f170b4fc0...@qg3g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>:
> >True.... it takes much more resources and organization
> >to launch such an attack.
> >The point, I am trying to establish is...whether or not
> >under the international law, the US embassy in Beijing
> >could be used for activities against China, including
> >mounting covert regime change activities.
> There is only ONE International Galactic law:
> The Right Of The Strongest
Are you saying...the international laws treating the
US embassy as US territory ...is a load of smelly
bull shit...
The law of the jungle (the rule of the strongest) is still
very much in force around the world. Western
civilization...has not advanced in spite of appearances...
and scientific progress.
But...our world has a uncanny way to balance things...
The strongest of yesterday (the British empire ) is
no more...the sole super power of today (the USA)...is
no longer super...definitely on the way down...
In the Eastern horizon ,... the day is breaking....the
sun will be rising soon.
The darkness ( ruled by the law of the jungle)...will
soon be gone.
On Apr 29, 3:15 am, Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On a sunny day (Sun, 29 Apr 2012 02:56:35 -0700 (PDT)) it happened baldeagle
> <force....@gmail.com> wrote in
> <56763c02-ec47-44ac-96fa-f170b4fc0...@qg3g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>:
> >True.... it takes much more resources and organization
> >to launch such an attack.
> >The point, I am trying to establish is...whether or not
> >under the international law, the US embassy in Beijing
> >could be used for activities against China, including
> >mounting covert regime change activities.
> There is only ONE International Galactic law:
> The Right Of The Strongest
> On Apr 29, 6:15 pm, Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On a sunny day (Sun, 29 Apr 2012 02:56:35 -0700 (PDT)) it happened baldeagle
> > <force....@gmail.com> wrote in
> > <56763c02-ec47-44ac-96fa-f170b4fc0...@qg3g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>:
> > >True.... it takes much more resources and organization
> > >to launch such an attack.
> > >The point, I am trying to establish is...whether or not
> > >under the international law, the US embassy in Beijing
> > >could be used for activities against China, including
> > >mounting covert regime change activities.
> > There is only ONE International Galactic law:
> > The Right Of The Strongest
> Are you saying...the international laws treating the
> US embassy as US territory ...is a load of smelly
> bull shit...
> The law of the jungle (the rule of the strongest) is still
> very much in force around the world. Western
> civilization...has not advanced in spite of appearances...
> and scientific progress.
> But...our world has a uncanny way to balance things...
> The strongest of yesterday (the British empire ) is
> no more...the sole super power of today (the USA)...is
> no longer super...definitely on the way down...
> In the Eastern horizon ,... the day is breaking....the
> sun will be rising soon.
> The darkness ( ruled by the law of the jungle)...will
> soon be gone.
On a sunny day (Sun, 29 Apr 2012 07:47:01 -0700 (PDT)) it happened rst0
<rst0w...@yahoo.com> wrote in
<741c168e-2a6d-436c-b209-b5797e863...@h4g2000pbe.googlegroups.com>:
>On Apr 29, 3:15 am, Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On a sunny day (Sun, 29 Apr 2012 02:56:35 -0700 (PDT)) it happened baldea=
>gle
>> <force....@gmail.com> wrote in
>> <56763c02-ec47-44ac-96fa-f170b4fc0...@qg3g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>:
>> >True.... it takes much more resources and organization
>> >to launch such an attack.
>> >The point, I am trying to establish is...whether or not
>> >under the international law, the US embassy in Beijing
>> >could be used for activities against China, including
>> >mounting covert regime change activities.
>> There is only ONE International Galactic law:
>> The Right Of The Strongest
>Yes, completely right.
In perspective, I have thought of two solutions:
1) They ask 1 million for him, that will reduce the deficit.
or
2) They kill him, and then give the body back, I mean he is blind and could have fallen from a stair by accident.
That would solve the diplomatic problem.
Just some ideas, because I do not know if and how they can get him from that
embassy to the US? Maybe smuggle him in the diplomatic mail?
Like in a very large suitcase?
;-)
> On a sunny day (Sun, 29 Apr 2012 07:47:01 -0700 (PDT)) it happened rst0
> <rst0w...@yahoo.com> wrote in
> <741c168e-2a6d-436c-b209-b5797e863...@h4g2000pbe.googlegroups.com>:
> >On Apr 29, 3:15 am, Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> On a sunny day (Sun, 29 Apr 2012 02:56:35 -0700 (PDT)) it happened baldea=
> >gle
> >> <force....@gmail.com> wrote in
> >> <56763c02-ec47-44ac-96fa-f170b4fc0...@qg3g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>:
> >> >True.... it takes much more resources and organization
> >> >to launch such an attack.
> >> >The point, I am trying to establish is...whether or not
> >> >under the international law, the US embassy in Beijing
> >> >could be used for activities against China, including
> >> >mounting covert regime change activities.
> >> There is only ONE International Galactic law:
> >> The Right Of The Strongest
> >Yes, completely right.
> In perspective, I have thought of two solutions:
> 1) They ask 1 million for him, that will reduce the deficit.
China will not pay a million dollars for him. I think the Chinese
government will gladly let him go into exile in the U.S.
In an attempt to stir up revolt and turmoil for China, we, in a sense,
will end up with more and more of Chinese's junks and unwanted
citizens which we must somehow support. It will be a heavy cost to us
as a nation, and we are at a bad economic condition already.
> or
> 2) They kill him, and then give the body back,
This will reflect badly on us.
> I mean he is blind and could have fallen from a stair by accident.
> That would solve the diplomatic problem.
Yes, but, since's in our hand, anything bad happens to him reflects
badly on us. While he's in our embassy and in our care, we must keep
him alive at all cost.
> Just some ideas, because I do not know if and how they can get him from that
> embassy to the US? Maybe smuggle him in the diplomatic mail?
> Like in a very large suitcase?
> ;-)
At this point, I don't think the Chinese government cares. It's out
of their hands, and that is all they wanted.
Now, the ball is in our hands. What are we going to do with him? No
one thought about it when they help him out of his house arrest. It
will be costly to us, and we are in bad economic shape already!!!!
> On Apr 29, 6:15 pm, Jan Panteltje<pNaonStpealm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On a sunny day (Sun, 29 Apr 2012 02:56:35 -0700 (PDT)) it happened baldeagle
>> <force....@gmail.com> wrote in
>> <56763c02-ec47-44ac-96fa-f170b4fc0...@qg3g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>:
>>> True.... it takes much more resources and organization
>>> to launch such an attack.
>>> The point, I am trying to establish is...whether or not
>>> under the international law, the US embassy in Beijing
>>> could be used for activities against China, including
>>> mounting covert regime change activities.
>> There is only ONE International Galactic law:
>> The Right Of The Strongest
> Are you saying...the international laws treating the
> US embassy as US territory ...is a load of smelly
> bull shit...
> The law of the jungle (the rule of the strongest) is still
> very much in force around the world. Western
> civilization...has not advanced in spite of appearances...
> and scientific progress.
> But...our world has a uncanny way to balance things...
> The strongest of yesterday (the British empire ) is
> no more...the sole super power of today (the USA)...is
> no longer super...definitely on the way down...
> In the Eastern horizon ,... the day is breaking....the
> sun will be rising soon.
> The darkness ( ruled by the law of the jungle)...will
> soon be gone.
> Hallelujah, hallelujah, hallelujah..
why are you praising the (according to you) fairy-tale character?
are you a hypocrite or just a fuckwit ignorant of your own
inconsistency?
> > On Apr 29, 6:15 pm, Jan Panteltje<pNaonStpealm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> On a sunny day (Sun, 29 Apr 2012 02:56:35 -0700 (PDT)) it happened baldeagle
> >> <force....@gmail.com> wrote in
> >> <56763c02-ec47-44ac-96fa-f170b4fc0...@qg3g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>:
> >>> True.... it takes much more resources and organization
> >>> to launch such an attack.
> >>> The point, I am trying to establish is...whether or not
> >>> under the international law, the US embassy in Beijing
> >>> could be used for activities against China, including
> >>> mounting covert regime change activities.
> >> There is only ONE International Galactic law:
> >> The Right Of The Strongest
> > Are you saying...the international laws treating the
> > US embassy as US territory ...is a load of smelly
> > bull shit...
> > The law of the jungle (the rule of the strongest) is still
> > very much in force around the world. Western
> > civilization...has not advanced in spite of appearances...
> > and scientific progress.
> > But...our world has a uncanny way to balance things...
> > The strongest of yesterday (the British empire ) is
> > no more...the sole super power of today (the USA)...is
> > no longer super...definitely on the way down...
> > In the Eastern horizon ,... the day is breaking....the
> > sun will be rising soon.
> > The darkness ( ruled by the law of the jungle)...will
> > soon be gone.
> > Hallelujah, hallelujah, hallelujah..
> why are you praising the (according to you) fairy-tale character?
> are you a hypocrite or just a fuckwit ignorant of your own
> inconsistency?
> ;-)
Since Western media can say "Allah Akbar" ...
Since the time, I am allowed to use the word god...
Since ...the Wester believe in the first amendment.
On Apr 29, 11:33 pm, rst0 <rst0w...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Apr 29, 7:59 am, Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
.> In an attempt to stir up revolt and turmoil for China, we, in
.> a sense, will end up with more and more of Chinese's junks
.> which we must somehow support.
By support, you mean the US give them
good jobs and financial help ?
Not true....Many of those rebel students of TAM
went to the USA....and found out the bitter truth...
They were left to fend for themselves without
jobs (or social security). I know...a few had to
work as kitchen helpers in SFO...in their old age.
They died disillusioned.
> > or
> > 2) They kill him, and then give the body back,
> This will reflect badly on us.
> > I mean he is blind and could have fallen from a stair by accident.
> > That would solve the diplomatic problem.
> Yes, but, since's in our hand, anything bad happens to him reflects
> badly on us. While he's in our embassy and in our care, we must keep
> him alive at all cost.
> > Just some ideas, because I do not know if and how they can get him from that
> > embassy to the US? Maybe smuggle him in the diplomatic mail?
> > Like in a very large suitcase?
> > ;-)
> At this point, I don't think the Chinese government cares. It's out
> of their hands, and that is all they wanted.
> Now, the ball is in our hands. What are we going to do with him? No
> one thought about it when they help him out of his house arrest.
They are used by the USA as pawns...in creating social unrests
and uprising in China.
The USA must be seen to be giving help... when these brainless
pawns are being punished by China. These idiots expects to be
given US citizenship and be taken care of ...for the rest of their
life.
Discussion subject changed to "So you can say; "The CIA planned it. The CIA directed it. The CIA wanted it done. And the CIA did it."" by bmoore@nyx.net
Discussion subject changed to "When US hiding escaped blind activist Chen ...should China be host to Clinton and Geithner who come, uninvited, seeking economic support and asking China to take up more debt bonds ?" by baldeagle
Subject: When US hiding escaped blind activist Chen ...should China be host to Clinton and Geithner who come, uninvited, seeking economic support and asking China to take up more debt bonds ?
Clinton and Geithner, the US foreign affairs 'minister' and economic
'minister' are scheduled to come to Beijing, uninvited, on Monday to
seek economic support and to ask China to take up more billions of US
debt bonds.
Unfortunately for them, the US embassy in Beijing has just provided
'protective refuge' to a convicted criminal who escaped from house
detention, which completely pissed off the Chinese leaders. China is
not in the a generous mood ...to listen to Clinton or Geithner.
Hu Jintao and Wen JiaBao would be seen as weaklings..leader without
backbone... if they are to give in to the USA. They would certainly
not risk damaging their good image at this time...just before they
retire.
Subject: Re: When US hiding escaped blind activist Chen ...should China be host to Clinton and Geithner who come, uninvited, seeking economic support and asking China to take up more debt bonds ?
>Clinton and Geithner, the US foreign affairs 'minister' and economic
>'minister' are scheduled to come to Beijing, uninvited, on Monday to
>seek economic support and to ask China to take up more billions of US
>debt bonds.
>Unfortunately for them, the US embassy in Beijing has just provided
>'protective refuge' to a convicted criminal who escaped from house
>detention, which completely pissed off the Chinese leaders. China is
>not in the a generous mood ...to listen to Clinton or Geithner.
>Hu Jintao and Wen JiaBao would be seen as weaklings..leader without
>backbone... if they are to give in to the USA. They would certainly
>not risk damaging their good image at this time...just before they
>retire.
>The USA are a bunch of bungling idiots.
All of them combined do not have a bilionth of my knowledge and
intelligence
> > > > BBC reported that an escaped prisoner, Chen Guangcheng, is hiding in
> > > > the US embassy in Beijing.
> > > > The BBC report said: "Chen Guangcheng is in the US embassy in Beijing
> > > > following his dramatic escape from house arrest. Mr Chen is under "US
> > > > protection" ..."
> > > > Wao liao. This is exciting...like Hollywood movie...
> > .> > Anyone know, under international laws, whether or not an
> > .> > embassy can be legitimately used as a hiding place ...
> > .> By international law, the U.S. embassy, consulates, ARE part of the
> > .> U.S. An attack on the embassy/consulate is an attack on the U.S.
> > .> itself.
> > Yes. I am aware of this legal protection for the embassy...but ....
> > The question is, despite the embassy being granted the
> > status as "a part of the USA"...does the law explicitly give
> > the US ambassador in Beijing... the right to use the Beijing
> > embassy for activities against China...eg. use it as a base
> > for launching a missile targeting the China leaders...
> > .> > What happened, if China used the PLA to storm the US embassy
> > .> > to recapture the escaped convict ?
> > .> > Technically, this was an attack on China. Of course, the U.S.
> > ,< > can get away with it because the U.S. has the biggest and more
> > .> > numerous weapons than China,
> > So, using the attack on the Chinese Embassy Belgrade as
> > a precedent, the PLA could storm the US embassy in Beijing
> > to recapture the escaped prisoner?
> Is this little man worth that kind of price? No. As a matter of
> fact, let him leave China, and let him find out how tough it is to
> make a living in the West.
> > Of course, China did not have the biggest weapon nor more
> > numerous weapons than the USA. (the US has the largest
> > nuclear arsenal in the world)
> > For this reason, China must not storm the US embassy...unless
> > she is prepared for the consequences.
> > Wonder what the USA will do, if the PLA storm the US embassy
> > in Beijing. Launch an invasion of China...like Mc Arthur ?
The problem is that with the American track record; any dissident who
is supported by (american,Israeli)west, should automatically be
discredited, until he or she proves otherwise.
Now the American support of the Iranian Green Revolution, was a nail
in it's coffin. Their leaders found out the hard way, not to ever give
another opening to the West.
Now this Chinese guy, is forever tainted, in everyone's eye.
or of course, he could be a Chinese plant in the US embassy....to get
a closer look, perhaps. We'll watch on Fox News, how this story should
continue. They always seem to know events before they happen so
consistently for the last 40 years, under Rupert
