[0608] Shih's possible armed insurgency?

Shih's possible armed insurgency?

Recently DPP's ex-president Shih Ming-Te had a journelist conference, asking Taiwanese to pay him (total 100 million New Taiwan dollars) for anti-bian movement. This is very weird. First of all, recalling of a president is a given right for Taiwanese. Why the hell do people need to pay Shih in order to exercise the right that they already have ?

Secondly, Shih opened personal accounts and receive so much money, but he never mentioned how he is gonna use that money. Besides the sitting-in, he simply said he has it all planned. What does he really have in mind?

Thirdly, suppose that he is gonna organize huge demonstration. But, in his anti-bian website (*), he said to the public clearly:

# We don't want any flag (national flags, party flags, campaign flags, school flags, faction flags)
# We don't welcome any campaign props and ads (campaign jackets, party jackets...)
# 我們不要任何其他旗幟：國旗、黨旗、競選旗、校旗、派系旗，都不要。
# 我們不歡迎任何競選道具和廣告；競選背心、助選背心、政黨背心，都不要。

He said it out loud that he is not gonna invest the donated money on things that are usually needed for a political demonstration.

Then ... besides a demonstration, what else can he do, with that whole chunk of money ?

Suddenly I was hit by an old memory. In Shih's teenage, he determined to enter the army school. In Taiwan, the popular perception is that only whoever fails the entrance exam to normal schools would consider entering an army school. So very very few Taiwanese would devote his/her career to the army. Shih did that, and from the documents disclosed later, we know that he did that because he wanted to learn how to organize people for an armed coup to overthrow the KMT government. It seems to reveal his characteristics: whatever he doesn't agree, he wouldn't hesitate going extreme with violence.

Other than the inborn nature, it would need a combination of many other factors for one to choose a violent means. For example, when one is in a high position in government, is very rich, is well-respected in the society ... etc, considering a violent means might turn a wonderful life into jail time or even death and thus lose all feasts, it's less likely that he would do so.

Judging Shih's life in recent years -- being discarded by Taiwanese (failed a campaign of legislator miserably), being kept distant by DPP members and pan-green supporters (he is going closer and closer to the pan-blue side), has to rely on KMT's support to live (according to his ex-wife Linda)... he is in the brim of total collapse, in terms of almost all sides of life (position, reputation, wealth ...). Comparing to his life ten years ago, at that time he was well respected as a hero in the Taiwan's democratic history, the combination of all those abjection courses could cast a higher chance for him to 'light a fire' in the late age of his life, which would fit his teenager dream perfectly.


* Shih's anti-bian web: http://www.newtaiwan.org.tw/
$ This article in manderinhttp://echotaiwan.blogspot.com/2006/08/blog-post.html
! This article in "anti-media" http://www.anti-media.tw/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=15221

[0608] 慎防施明德武裝暴動

近日民進黨前主席施明德為了反扁召開記者會，要求台灣人付錢給他讓他反扁。這是個很不尋常的舉動。一來，「罷免總統」是人民應有的權利，享用你原來就有的權利，為什麼要付錢給施明德？因此這個錢收得很奇怪。

二者，施明德收了那麼多錢，但卻未曾跟付錢者交代他打算怎麼花錢。他除了說要靜坐以外，只說，山人自有妙計。這妙計到底是什麼呢？

三者，假設他想搞群眾運動好了，但在他的倒扁網站上（註一），卻清楚明白地告訴民眾：一般群眾運動所需的旗幟、衣服等必要支出都要省下，也就是說，倒扁捐款不會用在群眾運動支出上。

那。。。民主法治外的「倒扁行動」，除了「群眾運動」外，還會有什麼可能性？

我突然想起來，施明德早年立志要念軍校。台灣人立志從軍的很少，從後來的文件知道，他當年從軍的主要目的，是要學習軍隊的組織與運作，以做為武裝推翻國民黨的基礎。可見，施明德對他看不爽的事情，有「不惜武裝一戰」的革命性格。

一個人會採取暴動的手段，除了「革命性格」之外，還要有「外在條件」配合。譬如說，假如一個人在政府中當高官、在社會中享有崇高的地位、手邊有無盡的財富。。。這些「享受」都「令他滿意」的時候，在考慮到暴動可能使他由「享受」變成「坐牢」甚至「死亡」而喪失所有的享受時，那儘管再怎麼有革命性格，恐怕不會想要走極端。

從這個角度來看施明德近幾年所面臨的「外在條件」。施明德當年以台灣英雄之姿進入立法院，結果常常熬夜泡酒家導致缺席不開會，在立法院立委出席率排名倒數有名，長期的怠惰失職與私生活的不檢點，終使他在 2001年的立委選舉中被選民所唾棄。接下來的言論，漸漸偏離了泛綠色彩，也與泛藍人士來往更加密切。而這回跳出來呼應泛藍的倒扁期望進行募款，就有傳出他這舉動是為了還債，也許是個人欠債，也許是利用民眾匯款時交給銀行的手續費來抵還貸款（報載銀行光是手續費就可以收入千萬）。

可以想見，施明德近幾年的生活，不管是名聲、地位、財富，都可以用「落魄」來形容。這樣的「外在條件的落魄」，配上他的「革命性格」，可謂是火上加油，「鋌而走險」的事情，是很可能發生的。換言之，施明德很可能用募來的款項購買武器，以他年輕時夢想著的「武裝暴動」，在他生命中的「日落西山」之時，燃起另一道火花。民進黨政府應該審慎評估這個可能性，並 早做提防。

日前報載施明德可能用「自焚」來作為反扁的激烈手段。這應該是不太可能發生的。畢竟很難想像一個沈溺於物質享受的的人會去自焚來犧牲一切。更何況，自焚只需一根火柴加一桶汽油，不需要台灣人付他一億元台幣吧？

註一：施明德倒扁網站 http://www.newtaiwan.org.tw/
註二：此文在媒抗：http://www.anti-media.tw/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=15221

[0607]『反扁連署』偽表列

網路反扁連署所有虛擬連署人的偽表列
更新時間：2006年7月26日 by Echo
總連署人數：23306

近來部分親綠學者動員反扁，並以毫無信用度可言的「網路連署」作為倒扁的民意基礎。網路連署雖然在網路廣泛為人應用後大為流行，但因為任何人都可以以任何假名連署，甚至可以同一人用不同名、不同電腦上線可以連署無數次，因此其「民意信用度」差不多等於零。

對稍微會寫程式的人如我者，我可以寫個小程式，從任一個「人名資料庫」裡每隔幾分鐘隨機抽取出一個人來，再配上「職業資料庫」裡隨機取出的任何職業，拼湊起來每隔一分到三分鐘（隨機）用不同的網路門徑登記連署，以這樣的「自動連署器」，放著電腦讓他自己跑一天，單我一個人一天就可以連署幾千甚至上萬次「虛擬」但「合法」的簽名。

因此，只要稍有電腦常識，就知道這次泛綠學者的反扁連署根本就是廢物。以堂堂學者之尊，竟然會拿這種毫無信用度的虛擬表列來做為政治抗爭的民意基礎，不免讓人感嘆台灣知識份子水準之低劣。

這種廢物還會造成另外一個社會問題：一些本來不反扁的知名人士可能被偷簽了而不自知。譬如說，閃靈樂團團長Freddy今天開記者會嗆聲說他根本沒簽，但名字卻在該份所謂的「已經查證過」的名單上出現:棄扁／我沒簽署！　閃靈樂團團長Freddy嗆：名單有問題～

因此，以這份廢物連署單，台灣的所有人都有可能被盜簽而不自知。為了方便台灣人易於查證您是否被盜簽，我特地寫了一個程式將所有簽署人全部抓在一個網頁上(http://taiwancare.info/endorse/antibian_fakelist.htm)，因此只要在該網頁上利用瀏覽器的的搜尋功能就可以看出誰有沒有在上頭。

程式的輸出表佔三個欄位如下：

0	07.15.2.77	蔡佳珊(人力資源經理)
1	07.15.12.497	原所森(餐飲業)
2	07.15.3.120	呂明澤(公民)
3	07.15.5.478	楊沾淳(經理)
4	07.15.8.444	丁淑娟

第一欄是排序，整個表的最後一個就代表總人數；
第二欄是 月.日.第幾頁.第幾號，可從此找回此名在原網頁中的位置；
第三欄是 人名（職業）

各位可以利用此頁，尋找自己是否有被盜簽，也可以查察有多少荒謬的簽名。

目前（7/26/2006）抽取到的總人數是：23306。 該網站上宣稱總計有 23554，浮報了 248 人之多。

[0606] Ma threatened the law : the government be run by different party

Ma Ying-Jeou, after being reluctant to get involved in the recall of President Chen for a while, now is actively leading his party KMT toward the goal of the recall in full speed. And, according to this report, KMT has an opinion on the progress of investigation on the "so-called" scandals . They think that the law enforcement doesn't "make the investigation speedy enough to satisfy KMT." So, now, the law in Taiwan DOES serve KMT ?????

More rediculous is how KMT's president Ma commented on this. He actually threatened the entire Taiwan investigation system by saying:

"One day the government will be run by a different party"
"All the things and people (about the current investigation) could be investigated (by the new government)"

How could a political leader in a supposedly democratic country openly threaten the entire law system with possible future retaliation in such a blunt manner ? And he threatens the law simply because that the way the investigation proceeds doesn't satify KMT's thirst !!

Ma also "announced" his "five-big-reasons" for pushing the recall:

1. To teach next generation ( by showing them what they could end up with for being pro-green? )
2. For Taiwanese dignity ( So Taiwanese dignity is saved by surrendering to pan-blue's society-breaking action? )
3. For Taiwan's democracy ( by showing people how to punish a person for a crime he never commited? )
4. For DPP's future ( Huh? When is Ma the DPP president as well ? )
5. To warn the law system ( HUH??? By threatening them that pan-blue can even recall a president, let alone any law guy ? )

In response to Chen's rebuttal against the accusation of him mentioned by pan-blue, Ma said:

"It's not me who asked him to corrupt; I told him not to corrupt, but he didn't listen to me. You can't blame me for that ..."

Now, in order to make his move of recall sounds justified, Ma has crossed the line of rationale and accused openly Chen of corruption, which is a shameless lie. He knew that President Chen didn't corrupt but now in order to achieve his personal agenda he'd rather lie.

So, how can you imagine a person like Ma won't fold under pressure ? Do you like him to be your future president ?

[0606] Ma: Chen will die a very tragic death !!

-- in response to Michael Turton's post Ma Ying-Jeou, Man in Motion

Ma (Ying-Jeou, 馬英九） doesn't seem to up to the job of a leader (of Pan-blue's). After holding up his attitude about recall for the presidency for days, in order to convince pan-blue supporters that he is still the leader, he said something like these:

"I could be very cruel when time comes."

"If Chen doesn't resign, but instead steps down by recall, he will die a tragic death !!"

What kind of political leader in a democratic country would use that kind of language, especially in a seriously divided society ? It's more like the barbarian communist politicians threatening their opponents.

With him going gradually closer to the center of political conflict, Ma does slowly reveal his true nature.

馬：不辭 扁會死得很難看

---------------

In response to an anonymous reader's post:

The point isn't on whether Ma was calling for Chen's assassination or not. In a society, not to mention a heavily divided one, any responsible political learder would always consider the impact of his/her words on easily provoked supporters, and avoid any hint or encouragement that might, on some emotional people, lead to violent actions.

Obviouisly Ma doesn't care about the possible violent consequence of what he said. He doesn't care if his words are taken as a 'go' signal for executing an assassination.

Or, maybe it's not fair to say so --- maybe that's exactly what he wanted. We don't really know, do we? Maybe that 'signal' has already triggered a secret plot under the surface, who knows ?

Don't forget the fact that 3(?) years ago there was a pan-blue guy openly called for a team to assassinate the president. That "call for assassination" news was all over the media.

[0606] Society-breaking conspiracy in Taiwan (2)

Follow-up from the (1) ...

Here is another typical example [1] of pan-blue's "society-breaking conspiracy". In this case, again, a public guilty sense was induced through media by pan-blue's manipulation with premature judgements based on pure circumstantial guesses and imaginations, way before any legal investigations were conducted.

It was followed by an investigation heavily biased by the outraged public pressure. In the end, the judge sentenced the accused 10 years in jail, 2 more years than what the district attorney asked for. Why 2 more years? The judge said that it is because the accused "deny the crime to the death" (死不認罪).

According to the news report [1][2], the official verdict, which is supposed to list the details of the crimes that the district attorneys can come up with, includes statements like these:

-- Crime motive:
"Because the accused knows X and Y pretty well in person, he SHOULD have the motive to commit this crime."

-- How the crime is committed:
"The accused SOMEHOW committed the crime"

-- Evidence:
"A telephone record between the accused and X showed conversation length of 0 second, indicating that a "signal" for committing the crime was sent."

When you call someone but the phone is not picked up, it shows 0 second on record. So to live in Taiwan, you'd better be home 24 hours a day, and make sure that the recipient be home before you make any call. Otherwise you might one day become a criminal because of that.

According to the accused, the judge ignored all or most of his not-guilty evidences, and made the judging based on public opinions but not facts, making the official verdict read more like a novel [2].

It's for certain that this "novel" will serve as an example for the current hot case about the first family --- if the investigation
and the sentencing of Chao, Jian-Ming (趙建銘）came out anything less, expect waves of anti-court, anti-government, society-breaking demonstrations launched by pan-blue.

It's a pitty that pan-green never came up with any way to counter this trick, even after so many years of fighting against pan-blue.

[0606] Society-breaking conspiracy in Taiwan

Taiwan has police stations and courts where a person can go report anything illegal. But Chiu Yi didn't go that legal path. Instead, he talks to the public through media, and planted seeds into people's minds, **before the legal system has a chance to investigate**.

Why does he not follow the legal way?

If you look into what he said carefully, most accusations he made were just not fact but suspecions. He (and other pan-blue politicians) is good at exagerating the suspecions, adding up all circumstancial evidences and making it look guilty. This process provokes the public. Then, a looked-guilty, people-outraged case is investigated. If it ends up with not-guilty charges, Chiu then has the outraged people to support him to ramp the court.

If he goes legal way, all those circumstancial suspecions will have no chance to be manipulated. Only by provoking public first, by which he can tag those suspecions with his own judgement, can he turn doubts into something more.

So the justice-seeking process in Taiwan now has the following pattern:

Pan-blue :
--> raise suspecions to public;
--> exagerated with premature accusation;
--> people got provoked;
--> whole country shouted guilty before any legal investigation
--> district attorneys step in
--> if they don't charge the accused, pan-blue mobilize people to the street

This pattern has been repeatedly used by pan-blue in the past couple of years, and probably will be used again and again in the future.

Judging from the extent of damage it brought to Taiwan's society, I can't stop wondering if Chinese government is behind all these.

PS: In response to Michael Turton's blog [The view from Taiwan] on
6/6/06