MANILA: China to Philippines: Quit Scarborough Shoal

Cev wrote:

Just read some 'Uncle Fargo' posts and he sounds fun!!! I wish he visits us in this topic after his vacation xD

BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR !

Actually, you were not much farther from the truth and your description of the uncle was more or less accurate. Fargo does pull down the pants of many posters who dare to come to the china forum and do all the things that he likes. You see, he is sexually diverse and the worse thing is that his young wife expired recently and consequently, he is on the 'hunt' for fresh meat again.

Last heard, he was headed towards your country. I am not sure, if it was business or pleasure. Either way, if I were a Filipino parent, I will never let my kids out of sight as long as the uncle was in the country.

Cev wrote:

<quoted text>
What the hell? I'm reasoning with you and giving you credit for your posts and you call me dishonest? My explanation regarding the shooting thing can hold its ground in court because the situation in both my example and this incident have a common factor, which is the arguement or the standoff between the two parties is still taking effect. Therefore, any such act, like firing a gun, will be considered an act of aggression!
If you did not believe what the chinese commentators said, then why post it here? It does not matter if you had the same opinion before any of the chinese in china did, what matters is your opinions are all the same, hence you believe them!
You ARE prejudiced to china and everyone can see that. i am merely explaining to you that a lot of information that you are getting, are false reports. And these false reports are the basis of your opinions. If you cannot accept the fact that your sources, wherever you get them if you don't get them from chinese media, are erroneuous, then research on them on your own if you can't take my word for it! If after confirming that your sources are wrong, but you still insist on having the same opinion they you are plain STUPID.
Just like what you said about the Philippines not wanting to talk. That's plain bullshet from the Chinese media, and even up to now, our government is trying to settle this issue with China embassy to embassy. We will not limit our options to just bilateral talks is what the philippines is doing. Has the case been filed yet? What do you think is the answer???
As i said in the previous post, THINK FOR YOURSELF. Yeeesh!

As for whether I am misinformed by these international sources including wiki is anybody's guess. We all have to start somewhere and I think it highly improbable that China has been more economical with the truth than the Philippines have - they are both going to present matters from their own perspective and interpretation. But I sincerely doubt that you are privy to the facts any more than I am. However, whether you genuinely have access the FACTS and all the FACTS or not, I do admire the way you can refit a naval warship into a harmless fisheries vessel at the stroke of a pen. I also admire the way you can change firing a warning shot at the sea into firing on fishing boats. One might constitute threatening behaviour while the other is attempted murder, slick or what! If the entire Philippines case is structured on this basis then its small wonder that the Chinese won’t lower themselves into going to court. Perhaps you should have been a lawyer or politician, perhaps you are.

Judge wrote:

<quoted text>
Yes we are all bored and found ourselves repeating. Fair play to you though, obviously you're the only worthy commentor here re China's stance. And I'm sure the defeated / pawned simpletons will once again hurl petty insults (which always ended in their faces anyway) if they read this.
That is what exactly will happen in any debate that has no arbiter nor mediator.. no one will win in discussions when no one tends to give in, especially if the prize is absolute (either you own it or you don't, no halving)..... unless of course someone gets tired of circling around then decided to physically beat the hell out of his adversaries. Debate ends and the stronger one declares himself the winner. Now would you prefer this type of barbaric outcome or would you rather debate with an arbiter? Remember no one is willing to give in as per their arguments, "bilateral talks" is much more of a fail for the two
Astoundingly, a handful simpletons here always mistook my stance as if I wanted to hand the shoal to Philippines. E.g. "bilateral talks failing, go for UN arbitration = pro Philippines", also "everybody has worse things to offer, not only Filipinos, but also EU citizens, Chinese very much included = Pro Philippines". It's like saying that anyone who tries levelling things or suggest neutral approach = pro enemy. Rubbish, I guess I pretty much over-estimated a fanatical commie by dealing with reason. No bother anyways, as one can always use some form of an entertainment as a ice breaker in this type of discussion.

You old sweet talker you but then you are Irish I guess.

I have had a number of posts disappear overnight for some strange reason so I guess there is some purpose in repeating ourselves. A short while ago you asked why the Chinese wont go to court although they will discuss the matter. I found this on a different forum and, if factual and although I cannot claim to speak for the Chinese, I can fully appreciate why the Chinese will not deign to give the Philippines their day in court because I guess that they would take their demand as a frivolous insult.:

"Why is it that NONE of the Philippine constitutions, past and present, from 1899, 1935, 1943, 1973, 1986 and 1987, include either the Spratlys or the Scarborough Shoal within their declared national territory? Where, or from whom, did they, all of a sudden, acquire title to these? Out of thin air?

In the late 1970s, China organized many scientific expeditions in the Shoal and around that area. In fact, in 1980, a stone marker reading “South China Sea Scientific Expedition” was installed by China on the South Rock. This Chinese marker was removed, without authority, by the Philippines in 1997.

All official maps published by the Philippines until the 1990s excluded both the Spratlys and Scarborough Shoal from its territorial boundaries. The Philippine Republic Act No. 3046, passed by their Congress and approved in 1961, stopped them from their claim. Yet, they had the temerity to amend this law on March 10, 2009, after 48 long years, to unilaterally include the disputed territories.

But what takes the cake is the fact that China holds three international treaties in support of its claim over the territories in question—namely, the 1898 Treaty of Paris between the US and Spain, the 1900 Treaty of Washington between Spain and the US, and the 1930 Treaty between Great Britain and the US, all limiting Philippine territorial limits to the 118th degree meridian of longitude east of Greenwich.

On the other hand, the basis of the Philippine claim is restricted to proximity, relying solely on the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. As far as I know, a mere “convention” cannot overturn or supersede a treaty or an agreement reached between colonial powers. And even if it were considered a “law”, it cannot be made to take effect retroactively.

Whom are they fooling?"

Good questions in my book if true.

Cev wrote:

<quoted text>
Ok that came out wrong. Didn't mean to sound so hostile, but what we need is a smart chinese who can debate, not another idiot like bruce lee or rayh.
Old china is the only chinaman left who's post have some essense of sense left it them..

Could that be because I am not Chinese?

judge wrote:

<quoted text>
Redundant.......You mentioned philippines is 101st in "corruption ranking" done by CIA - Communist Intelligence Agency. I bet China and N. korea both ranked last or better, not included in the list lol - again, too much cartoons & movies. Are you a frustrated communist movie director or something who likes to exempt communist china from everything bad the world has to offer? Ill not be surprised to hear that youre just an another paid stooge for propaganda crap. Its off topic and I already had my share of laughs anyway so to save me fingers from typing, Ill copy paste my previous post
"Sorry to burst your bubble but you can fool no one from a neutral community who hears news from a neutral source. Either way, your governments may filter facts to serve their purposes in addressing their respective nations, but it's well known fact that no one does exaggeration and distortion better than a commie state / military junta. Self-explanatory-- Communism not Democracy. Yes I've heard strings of bad news re Philippines, but I find it hypocritical that calling them lawless comes in defense of a FETUS/BABY eating nation who would rather witness and ignore a child point blank as she gets hit repeatedly and mutilated by vehicles than drag her to safety (one of the rare occassions the commie government failed to block the news outbreak eh?). Moreover I find it more hypocritical that the "lawless" Philippines is the one who had been inviting China to Intl court and resolve it legally, while China refuses everytime and resorts to isolating the situation to do some bullying. Yet, hearing these things does not capacitate me to call China as the most lawless / moral less nation in Asia, as I've also heard of situations in Burma & Cambodia. To each his own evil I reckon, and Europe ain't an exception.
One must be VERY ANGRY to call someone worst especially if it's no worse than him... and ANGER in forums like this manifest in the face of DEFEATISM in discussions. One more thing, your use of Mexico is plain silly... did you even know that there are higher crime rates in Venezuela, Brazil and a dozen more South American countries? Obviously, you watch too much cartoons & movies but I didn't expect a grown up individual would rely their facts on them. I can now imagine how fanatic commies digest facts and info that their commie government feeds them."

Imagine if you will a scenario where the Anglo-Irish Independence Treaty failed to make any mention of the islands scattered along the west coast of Ireland. The UK government then claims them by default as part of the territory still under the jurisdiction of the UK because they were colonial territory and there were no troops on station. I can imagine Dublin's reaction to such a frivolous claim. Would you tell the UK to get stuffed in such circumstances because I would?

Don't believe all the stories you read coming out of China, such as foetus consumption, as being true and even when true, they are not necessarily representative.

If people from the UK accused China over the T.Sq incidents then the Chinese would retaliate with Bloody Sunday. But in their arguments neither side would hand the other the gift of a debating point by comparing the extent while trying to level the score with a parallel event. If this creates the mistaken impression that China is perfect or even considers themselves to be half way perfect then you are misinterpreting pro China posts. Most of their posts are defensive in nature or the response to an attack and you will very rarely find the Chinese on say an American forum insulting them.

well olde chape, I have to admire the depths that you will go to, to protect your evil , corrupt, and brutal commie regime.
but then again,, the pay must be good huh?

Judge wrote:

<quoted text>
Off topic, it has got nothing to do with Scarborough Shoal standoff so please post it somewhere else on how you can contribute to an ailing economy. Otherwise post an argument in respective to the title.

Dont judged! if you're limitted with your view on how to deal with the standoff, perhaps your limitted solution is only to answer who has the right claim,who realy owns and who is more powerful. But I give you a credit of your right argument on the sight that your eyes had reached to see where you're standing now. But I advice you to try to look at it like on a distant place and look at why the chinese behaves like these? it because of economy. why why why? do you think chinese will just get it without knowing the economic value of the scarborough? and how can we fight this mongoloid giant if not though this kind of war? look at philippine market, like divisoria, you can see everywhere this chinese products, pirated and faked products copied from everywhere in the world, try to search how many products from your country that this chinese has pirated and faked! and who will not be buy it where they sell it in a very low price? ha ha ha

join me to campaign to boycott chinese product, soon there economy will fall! and in effect your economy will raise! this is the fight that I will tell to all filipinos.. we will win!

Judge wrote:

<quoted text>
You are deliberately ommitting details eh? That's what I call DEFEATISM. Tsk tsk... naughty naughty lame lame lame. That's what you get for watching too much movies & cartoons, you can no longer get hold of the facts.
For the benefit of readers, here's where Rong is wrong:
"Manila, April 30 (CNA) The Philippines' secretary of foreign affairs is refusing to meet with the Chinese ambassador to the country to discuss tensions in the South China Sea, a Philippine official said Monday. Foreign Secretary Albert del Rosario broke off talks with Ma Keqing on April 25, a Philippine official told CNA, because of what the Department of Foreign Affairs later described as "incomplete, inaccurate, and misleading" information Ma sent to Beijing regarding the recent dispute.

How could the Philippines' secretary of foreign affairs know what Ambassador Ma told Beijing?
It was obviously a lame excuse hoping that USA would back Philippines' claim.

judge wrote:

<quoted text>
Congratulations, you have the ability to imagine things, not imaginative enough however. Bet you can start athread in topix entitled "Post your racy stories here! Jokes about chinese not allowed". Now, what's your say on the topic again? oh right, You dont have one and cant blame you for that... you only do what a lingering one normally does in the face of DEFEATISM in discussions.... a very very angry troll

Dont take offense Irishman...

not all Irish are fat and ugly... just this guy was...

your country is BROKE... though... such big talk coming from a broke a$$$ country

big talking Europeans as they retreat from Austerity...

as for the Philippines

Savior the USA????
.
.

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...

old china wrote:

<quoted text>
Imagine if you will a scenario where the Anglo-Irish Independence Treaty failed to make any mention of the islands scattered along the west coast of Ireland. The UK government then claims them by default as part of the territory still under the jurisdiction of the UK because they were colonial territory and there were no troops on station. I can imagine Dublin's reaction to such a frivolous claim. Would you tell the UK to get stuffed in such circumstances because I would?
Don't believe all the stories you read coming out of China, such as foetus consumption, as being true and even when true, they are not necessarily representative.
If people from the UK accused China over the T.Sq incidents then the Chinese would retaliate with Bloody Sunday. But in their arguments neither side would hand the other the gift of a debating point by comparing the extent while trying to level the score with a parallel event. If this creates the mistaken impression that China is perfect or even considers themselves to be half way perfect then you are misinterpreting pro China posts. Most of their posts are defensive in nature or the response to an attack and you will very rarely find the Chinese on say an American forum insulting them.

very well written post...

yes most of the Chinese posters are mostly posting up defensive...

most of us understand China is far from perfect...

my post however are attacking the racist, or just plain stupid posters... however I have said many times my views are my own and not representative of Chinese or China...

61 PERCENT OF THE DEBT wrote:

<quoted text>
Dont take offense Irishman...
not all Irish are fat and ugly... just this guy was...
your country is BROKE... though... such big talk coming from a broke a$$$ country

Congratulations Wu Mao, you are attempting to make analogies

Defeated in discussions = check country
Broke country = should talk "small"
Exhaust diplomatic means to resolve issues = "big" talk
Defeatism = hurl lame insults
Post opinion not in favor of commie = hurl lame insult

Yyaawwnnn..... Next Wu Mao please.

P.s. dear propaganda boss, pls send à dozen more wu mao zealots

Grumpy Guy wrote:

One thing I have notice is that people from the Ireland, New Zealand India and the US(And maybe others I have not checked all the post) have come to defend the Philippines claim to these Islands. Only Chinese and a few Westerners who live in China have defended China claim to these shoals. No wonder why China does not want to submit its claim to an international court.

China is the evil empire these days...

I notice how you are quick to denounce the Chinese occupation and claims...

but if I were to ask you about the USA aid/support of Israel and their occupation of the occupied territories...

even though there is a UN resolution stating that Israel needs to leave...

would you say Israel or USA is in the wrong???...

or if I were to talk about how you live on Native Indian Land...

you will probably give me some story about how it was wrong to have taken their land... but now you are doing everything to make it up too them... and they are 1% of the population living on 2% of the land...

in regards to Taiwan... I think the Chinese are the true owners of the Islands...

but the people who call themselves Taiwanese took the land away from China and are currently holding it...

with the help of the USA... sending its ships and aid over the history of that conflict...

Taiwan... in this situation affirming the 1 China policy

61 PERCENT OF THE DEBT wrote:

<quoted text>
You "think" but you do not show proof....
that the Philippines claim is solely based on proximity
Old China provided facts you provided your OPINION...

Youre confused on my stance obviously, to even think that i should défend Philippines to claim scarborough shoal.Sigh.... Havent you been reading récent pages?

judge wrote:

<quoted text>
Youre confused on my stance obviously, to even think that i should défend Philippines to claim scarborough shoal.Sigh.... Havent you been reading récent pages?

no I think your confused...

you said this...

"However I think it's one sided as it cited that the Philippines claim is solely based on proximity as per UNCLOS."

then proceeded to type 2 paragraphs of your thoughts and feelings...

... my response to you, was show us the proof...

the Philippines claim is NOT solely based on proximity as per UNCLOS

not your thoughts and feeling but third party proof...fact figures etc... etc... etc

btw on another related topic....im curious about your thoughts on N Ireland... and what your position on it is...

Old China said posted this...

NONE of the Philippine constitutions, past and present, from 1899, 1935, 1943, 1973, 1986 and 1987, include either the Spratlys or the Scarborough Shoal within their declared national territory?

you need to provide facts to refute this claim...

.
.
All official maps published by the Philippines until the 1990s excluded both the Spratlys and Scarborough Shoal from its territorial boundaries.

you need to provide facts to refute this claim...

.
.
The Philippine Republic Act No. 3046, passed by their Congress and approved in 1961, stopped them from their claim. Yet, they had the temerity to amend this law on March 10, 2009, after 48 long years, to unilaterally include the disputed territories.

you need to provide facts to refute this claim...

.
.
But what takes the cake is the fact that China holds three international treaties in support of its claim over the territories in question—namely, the 1898 Treaty of Paris between the US and Spain, the 1900 Treaty of Washington between Spain and the US, and the 1930 Treaty between Great Britain and the US, all limiting Philippine territorial limits to the 118th degree meridian of longitude east of Greenwich.

you need to provide facts to refute this claim...

.
.

On the other hand, the basis of the Philippine claim is restricted to proximity, relying solely on the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. As far as I know, a mere “convention” cannot overturn or supersede a treaty or an agreement reached between colonial powers. And even if it were considered a “law”, it cannot be made to take effect retroactively.

you need to provide facts to refute this claim...

.
.

If you dont want to provide evidence to support your claims... then fine... just dont reply to his post giving us 2 paragraphs on your thoughts and feelings...

of how things are one sided...

61 PERCENT OF THE DEBT wrote:

<quoted text>
no I think your confused...
you said this...
"However I think it's one sided as it cited that the Philippines claim is solely based on proximity as per UNCLOS."
then proceeded to type 2 paragraphs of your thoughts and feelings...
... my response to you, was show us the proof...
the Philippines claim is NOT solely based on proximity as per UNCLOS
not your thoughts and feeling but third party proof...fact figures etc... etc... etc
btw on another related topic....im curious about your thoughts on N Ireland... and what your position on it is...

Indeed you're confused on my stance. If you've read the recent pages, not a bit you'd misconstrued my statement "However I think it's one sided as it cited that the Philippines claim is solely based on proximity as per UNCLOS."

Obviously I was particularly replying to old china's post (as per his claims it came from an another forum), and apparently the original poster was persuading readers by presenting China's a number of good arguments while he made it appear that Philippines had only one basis of claim and disacknowledges others. Hence the original poster had it one sided. Now, if you had been following this thread, whether prejudiced/biased or not, obviously it ain't the case as we've read stuff from Filipono commentors discussing Bajo de Masinloc, 1965 lighthouse, spanish colonization fishing grounds etc etc etc.

That's how simple your take should have been on that statement, no more no less. Never did I even put myself into position to validate or disacknowledge smart arguments from both countries, rather I'd go after "wu mao"ish comments who disrupts flow of intelligent discussion by some racist comments, hurling of insults, altered articles and commie propaganda crap.

I think 61 PERCENT OF THE DEBT is a wu mao. He should backread for his repetitive questions.

61 PERCENT OF THE DEBT wrote:

Old China said posted this...
NONE of the Philippine constitutions, past and present, from 1899, 1935, 1943, 1973, 1986 and 1987, include either the Spratlys or the Scarborough Shoal within their declared national territory?
you need to provide facts to refute this claim...
.
.
All official maps published by the Philippines until the 1990s excluded both the Spratlys and Scarborough Shoal from its territorial boundaries.
you need to provide facts to refute this claim...
.
.
The Philippine Republic Act No. 3046, passed by their Congress and approved in 1961, stopped them from their claim. Yet, they had the temerity to amend this law on March 10, 2009, after 48 long years, to unilaterally include the disputed territories.
you need to provide facts to refute this claim...
.
.
But what takes the cake is the fact that China holds three international treaties in support of its claim over the territories in question—namely, the 1898 Treaty of Paris between the US and Spain, the 1900 Treaty of Washington between Spain and the US, and the 1930 Treaty between Great Britain and the US, all limiting Philippine territorial limits to the 118th degree meridian of longitude east of Greenwich.
you need to provide facts to refute this claim...
.
.
On the other hand, the basis of the Philippine claim is restricted to proximity, relying solely on the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. As far as I know, a mere “convention” cannot overturn or supersede a treaty or an agreement reached between colonial powers. And even if it were considered a “law”, it cannot be made to take effect retroactively.
you need to provide facts to refute this claim...
.
.
If you dont want to provide evidence to support your claims... then fine... just dont reply to his post giving us 2 paragraphs on your thoughts and feelings...
of how things are one sided...

Redundant and already made my reply. It's incredible how one can misconstrue such a simple statement which is direct to the point. Like I've said, if you've been following this thread we could've saved oour fingers from typing

Having a hard time to go online due to my schedule, wait til i get back from my business trip. Look forward to it old china, and all the wu mao's who will miss me. >:)