Manila seeks int'l support in standoff with China

Pathological Government' Never Abuse Their Own People...

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_IUYlNU10BMY/Si4hkuW...

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

ChaunceyGardiner wrote:

<quoted text>
That's funny, I wrote very nearly the same thing to you a while ago.

He has a bad habit of taking other people's posts and modifying them a bit and then using them as his own. Must be that other than cut and paste the guy has no critical thinking skills or creativity...

ChaunceyGardiner wrote:

<quoted text>
That's funny, I wrote very nearly the same thing to you a while ago.

you had a few good post too... until I caught you fudging numbers on a article...

you americans have no shame at all...

At least I had a good post. You have had none.

I recall you posting fake websites as attribution (click the link and nothing happens, LOL!) and including fake stories to support your hatred of all things American. Oh well, you remain bitter about not being an American citizen and delusional about reality. Such is life.

kenny wrote:

<quoted text>
who you talkin to boy? Pinoys are the Chinese peoples servents!Now run and grab me a doughnut chimp

That's true, the Pinoys even exporting servants and slave to the rest of the world. 100 thousands in Hong Kong, America, Saudi, et el. The Philipines are the culture of slaves.

SMOKIN JOE CAMEL OBAMA wrote:

America will help the Filipinoes of shit turns to gunpowder, just like the Fils were our allies in WWII.
WE SHALL RETURN

While China offering the Philipinoes food and economy, the USA offering the Philipinoes gun and bullets/DEATH. Go figure.

Chinaman wrote:

Chinamen are orcs of middle earth, very ugly, very stupid, and there lots of these animals! Men of the West will smite the orcs!! Ha ha!!!

Only in your dreams. You can day dreaming it as well if you wish.

ChaunceyGardiner wrote:

<quoted text>
No. I realize that you were brought up reading Chinese censored history books but you blundered badly here. The Philippines did not 'kicked'(dumb fuck) the USA out in 1987. Following the destructive forces of Mt. Pinatubu's explosion, our bases were in need of massive repair. The Philippines saw an opportunity to demand more money and when the U.S. legislature said no, they chose not to renew the permanent base leases. A few years passed and some folks realized that they needed our support, technology, protection and guidance.
we no longer have large, permanant bases there. We have many FOBs and enjoy unrestricted air and water space rights. Despite our economic issues, American taxpayers continue to provide hundreds of millions of dollars each year to the RP. Our loans give us a presence and our unyielding support guarantees it.
Try again.

That is funny. I had been to China quite often, but could not read Chinese, you numbnuts! I had been living in the America most of my great life.

While we do not take sides on the competing sovereignty claims to land features in the South China Sea, as a Pacific power we have a national interest in freedom of navigation, the maintenance of peace and stability, respect for international law, and the unimpeded, lawful commerce across our sea lanes," she said.
.
.

Clinton's ambiguous position on the Scarborough Shoal standoff was a word-for-word playback of a US Congressional Research report issued in early April. The parse of the US response was that unless China attacks integral Philippine territory, rather than contested claims in the South China Sea, the US will refrain from any military intervention.

Philippine officials involved in the 2+2 meeting accepted the US's non-committal response and echoed Clinton's call for a diplomatic solution to the territorial dispute. In their statements, the two ministers admitted that the Philippines has neglected its external defense capabilities as the government poured military resources into internal conflicts, including combating a communist insurgency, Muslim separatist groups and the Abu Sayyaf terrorist group.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/N ...

Tanzanus wrote:

<quoted text>
That is funny. I had been to China quite often, but could not read Chinese, you numbnuts! I had been living in the America most of my great life.

dont waste your time talking to Chauncey... he is known to change facts in articles and present them as the truth...

he was caught doing this under his previous name

.
.

BTW i checked your facts...

http://www.topix.com/forum/world/philippines/...

Is Vietnam richer than Philipines

page 12

post 247

you put down....

At the end of 2009, China had 435.97 million rural people living below the poverty line which amounted to 43.6 per cent. But, as many as 150 million Chinese who lived on less than $1.25 a day were regarded as poor by the internationally accepted guidelines of the World Bank."

but I according to these sites...

.
.

http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/c ...

At the end of 2009, China had 35.97 million rural people living below the poverty line which amounted to 3.6 per cent. But, as many as 150 million Chinese who lived on less than $1.25 a day were regarded as poor by the internationally accepted guidelines of the World Bank.

.
.

http://business.rediff.com/report/2010/oct/28 ...

At the end of 2009, China had 35.97 million rural people living below the poverty line which amounted to 3.6 per cent. But, as many as 150 million Chinese who lived on less than $1.25 a day were regarded as poor by the internationally accepted guidelines of the World Bank.

.
.

http://english.sina.com/china/2010/1027/34547 ...

At the end of 2009, China had 35.97 million rural people living below the poverty line. This was 3.6 percent of the rural population, official figures showed.

But, as many as 150 million Chinese were actually living on less than $1.25 a day and were regarded as poor by the internationally accepted guidelines of the World Bank

.

150 million is just 10.7 % of China's population.

Tanzanus wrote:

<quoted text>
That is funny. I had been to China quite often, but could not read Chinese, you numbnuts! I had been living in the America most of my great life.

I've been to China quite often...blah...blah...blah...

I go to China no less than 4 times a year...you're an amateur... you don't know sh!t about China...

Chinamen = orcs and hobgoblins :)

Tanzanus wrote:

<quoted text>
So, you think that the world is listenin to you? Hahaha... that is a laff!

We'll if you don't listen its not my loss! buy their products and provide it to your children! ha ha ha chinese are greed, they live to swindle people, they sell food products that is nice to your taste and to your children, even it has and ingredients of food poisoning! what is important to them is to make money!

Chunk wrote:

Chinamen = orcs and hobgoblins :)

You Chunk === SOB

RayH wrote:

150 million is just 10.7 % of China's population.

yes I use that example to show how Chauncey fudge the numbers trying to make the number fit his half the people in China live under the poverty line...
.
.

China officially included about 100 million of those people in its "own" poverty figures... late last year

China’s economy
Poor by definition

China’s government offers relief to the poor and to the economy

Dec 3rd 2011 | HONG KONG |

SINCE 1978 China has liberated more people from poverty than any other country in history, partly because China before 1978 consigned more people to poverty than anywhere else in history. But this week China added over 100m to the ranks of the poor. This was not the result of some economic calamity, but of the government’s welcome decision to relax its definition of rural poverty. About 128m Chinese countryfolk earning less than 2,300 yuan ($361) a year will now be deemed poor, compared with the 26.9m who fell beneath the previous poverty line of 1,196 yuan.

China has a tradition of defining destitution abstemiously, perhaps in an effort to keep the poverty count low and the relief bill down. But this week’s decision raises China’s poverty line close to or even above the World Bank’s global standard of $1.25 per day. That standard is widely misunderstood. It is calculated not at market exchange rates, but at purchasing-power parity rates, which take account of the lower prices prevailing in poor countries. China’s new, higher line qualifies 100m more people for a variety of benefits. That is good news for China’s poor, and also good news for China’s slowing economy. An official measure of manufacturing activity, based on surveys of purchasing managers, dropped to 49 on December 1st, its lowest reading since January 2009 (see chart). Managers feel business worsened or stagnated in November, compared with the month before.

Europe’s woes must account for much of this disappointment. The rest of the blame probably lies with the government’s efforts to fight inflation by tightening the supply of money and credit. For the past couple of months it has been “fine-tuning” this policy, easing up on some things, but not on others. On November 30th it opted for something more dramatic, cutting the amounts that banks must keep in reserve at the central bank by 0.5 percentage points.

That should ease the credit crunch that hurt many businesses over the summer. The fear, however, is that freeing the banks could lead to a lending spree like the one that rescued China from the previous crisis. That lending saddled many local governments with debts they are struggling to repay. These loans will be rolled over once, according to reports. But if local governments still need a bail-out after that, they will have to cede some of their budgetary freedoms to Beijing. That is how fiscal federalism works—as Europe is about to discover.

If China’s slowdown remains modest, the government may get away with modest monetary measures: loosening the reins on the banks, without letting go. But if the economy deteriorates sharply, the government may lean more heavily on fiscal remedies. The central government is flush with cash, taking in 28% more in revenue this year than over the same period last year. And excessive lending to the banks’ traditional borrowers (state-owned enterprises and local governments) will help the economy less than extra spending on neglected constituencies, such as the 128m rural poor. If China is worried about the economic winter ahead, it should fatten up its skeletal welfare programmes, not its bloated banking system.

http://www.economist.com/node/21541080

DISCLOSURE 2012 wrote:

<quoted text>
I've been to China quite often...blah...blah...blah...
I go to China no less than 4 times a year...you're an amateur... you don't know sh!t about China...

what a piece of crap Disclosure is... goes to China 4 times a year for business... to get supplies, equipment etc etc etc...

yet he has tried to downplay the role China plays with his Chinese Family's business

we really should stop talking to this abomination... until he tells his family his true feelings...

man what a weasel....

61 PERCENT OF THE DEBT wrote:

<quoted text>
what a piece of crap Disclosure is... goes to China 4 times a year for business... to get supplies, equipment etc etc etc...
yet he has tried to downplay the role China plays with his Chinese Family's business
we really should stop talking to this abomination... until he tells his family his true feelings...
man what a weasel....

His Chinese family will disown him.

Reading all the comments these guys offer each day is irritating. None but non of them knows anything about warfare and nuclear weapons , yet here they are acting like experts and ex-generals trying to stir the world into a war by their comments and schemes. Cant you guys just sit by and watch the developement from the news each day ?China and America will NEVER go to war with each other, period. They need each other. one more period ! lol

china should resolve the disputes by peacful mean
be fair to the neighbors.use force never work but contrary.