I do not believe that Richard Hartzell is pursuing a philosophy of law. The effective control of Taiwan is run by the ROC, as the SFPT administrative authorities. This is undisputable. Only an American moron would be so condescending.
The unrepentant condescension of Brian Kennedy egomania is obviously
rooted in cultural bias and arrogance of superiority. Such prejudice is not even legitimated by the California Bar nor any US legal license to practice arrogance. I have nothing but contempt for California lawyers like Gray Davis.
The fact that Taiwan is not run by Beijing is the effective deterrent of the TRA. I am not interested in academic theories of any strategic or political science commentaries.
In the real world, how does TRA as domestic legislation still infringe upon the Chinese sovereignty? It goes back to the SFPT and One China policy.
But then I bet Brian Kennedy never served in any foxholes during Vietnam. Probaby got his prestigious docturate in law on a draft deferral.
I live in the real world of me-firsters.
Well, I have said my piece and I stand behind everything I have said. I started re-posting here as a “favor” to Gus, who took the time to write me a long email in response to my views that Segue had gone down the tubes. I appreciated that…but I see that Segue in fact has gone down the tubes.
[quote=“brianlkennedy”]Well, I have said my piece and I stand behind everything I have said. I started re-posting here as a “favor” to Gus, who took the time to write me a long email in response to my views that Segue (Now Forumosa) had gone down the tubes. I appreciated that…but I see that Segue (Now Forumosa) in fact has gone down the tubes.
adios,
Brian[/quote]
You come back this instant. You’re one of the few with a real brain around here.
[quote=“Wangbing”]I do not believe that Richard Hartzell is pursuing a philosophy of law. The effective control of Taiwan is run by the ROC, as the SFPT administrative authorities. This is undisputable. Only an American moron would be so condescending.
The unrepentant condescension of Brian Kennedy egomania is obviously
rooted in cultural bias and arrogance of superiority. Such prejudice is not even legitimated by the California Bar nor any US legal license to practice arrogance. I have nothing but contempt for California lawyers like Gray Davis.
The fact that Taiwan is not run by Beijing is the effective deterrent of the TRA. I am not interested in academic theories of any strategic or political science commentaries.
In the real world, how does TRA as domestic legislation still infringe upon the Chinese sovereignty? It goes back to the SFPT and One China policy.
But then I bet Brian Kennedy never served in any foxholes during Vietnam. Probaby got his prestigious docturate in law on a draft deferral.
I live in the real world of me-firsters.[/quote]
[quote=“Flicka”][quote=“brianlkennedy”]Well, I have said my piece and I stand behind everything I have said. I started re-posting here as a “favor” to Gus, who took the time to write me a long email in response to my views that Segue (Now Forumosa) (Now Forumosa) had gone down the tubes. I appreciated that…but I see that Segue (Now Forumosa) (Now Forumosa) in fact has gone down the tubes.
adios,
Brian[/quote]
You come back this instant. You’re one of the few with a real brain around here.[/quote]
Although I appreciate Kennedy’s comment, I have to take issue with your comment that he has “a real brain.” He burnt his own out long ago and bought the current one at Shihlin Night Market. I know because I was there and we negotiated a two-for-one deal.
[quote]Tue Aug 19, 2003 [color=red]
3:28 am
[/color]
I do not believe that Richard Hartzell is pursuing a philosophy of law. The effective control of Taiwan is run by the ROC, as the SFPT administrative authorities. This is undisputable. Only an American moron would be so condescending.
The unrepentant condescension of Brian Kennedy egomania is obviously
rooted in cultural bias and arrogance of superiority. Such prejudice is not even legitimated by the California Bar nor any US legal license to practice arrogance. I have nothing but contempt for California lawyers like Gray Davis.
The fact that Taiwan is not run by Beijing is the effective deterrent of the TRA. I am not interested in academic theories of any strategic or political science commentaries.
In the real world, how does TRA as domestic legislation still infringe upon the Chinese sovereignty? It goes back to the SFPT and One China policy.
But then I bet Brian Kennedy never served in any foxholes during Vietnam. Probaby got his prestigious docturate in law on a draft deferral.
I live in the real world of me-firsters.[/quote]
I think we can assume that the author of the above post was up well past his or her bed time and most probably intoxicated.
The Internet offers a an excellent platform for anyone to post their thoughts and ideas. Unfortunately anybody who can click a mouse can post anything they like. It is a risk we take.
Most of us don’t get paid to write here. Some of us do get some very good ideas and others perspectives on many issues.
There are people in Taiwan who have a lot to lose if the human rights situation in Taiwan improves. From the context of this individuals post he most probably falls into that catagory.
Pleaase don’t let one individual distract you from the purpose of this discussion.
You’ve never explained what your proposed new human rights group would do. I mean, your initial question was about how much people would be willing to pay as an initiation fee and an annual fee, but you didn’t tell us about the “big picture.” Will it focus on human rights in general, or target the problems faced by particular groups – Filipino maids or Southeast Asian factory workers or foreign English teachers? Unless you expect us to blindly hand over money for a cause that is to be defined in the future, please let us in on the details.
human rights issues can be dealt with by one agency/foundation/ngo, whatever you call it, as long as they can staff it with either paid employees or volunteers with bilingual skills, in particular, tagalog, indonesian, thai, english, spanish, german, etc. to receive complaints and concerns from individuals of these linguistic groups. i think if there is enough demands, foreigners with spare time and energy can volunteer to help out other foreigners.
So what you are saying is that no experience, legal training, or knowledge of Chinese language/culture is required . . . . . . .
Interesting thought . . . . . . however, this is quite a bit different from what I had in mind . . . . . since I am planning to provide expert levels of counseling, problem-resolution, etc.
Of course, the Association will deal with whatever issues the membership (whether individual members, or the majority of the membership) feel are important.
This is a perfectly adequate statement of our goals.
You will note that a lot of the posters to the Legal Matters Forums on forumosa.com need more than “general advice,” they need specific legal assistance. A human rights association such as I have in mind will be able to provide that. We will be able to liaison with local professionals who can provide such services . . . . as one example.
[quote=“Hartzell”]Of course, the Association will deal with whatever issues the membership (whether individual members, or the majority of the membership) feel are important.
This is a perfectly adequate statement of our goals.[/quote]
No, it’s not. What if I donate my money only to find out that I’m the only Filipino maid among 50 English teachers and that the issues I care about are completely different from theirs? If the majority rules, I don’t see how that will satisfy me as a member. Organizations need game plans.
So, is it going to be aimed mainly at the type of people who post here on Forumosa?
That is one example. If the Filipino maid has a problem that she needs help on, such as overstay, employer relations, unfair or illegal working conditions, etc. then that will be evaluated, and we will inform her how we can help. . . . . the same would apply to anyone else who contacted us as well.
This is much better than any of the other current “human rights groups” – not because those groups are not effective, but because they cannot deal with the problems and needs of foreigners (including English language communication.)
So what you are saying is that no experience, legal training, or knowledge of Chinese language/culture is required . . . . . . .
Interesting thought . . . . . . however, this is quite a bit different from what I had in mind . . . . . since I am planning to provide expert levels of counseling, problem-resolution, etc.[/quote]
The volunteers (the foreigners with the requisite language proficiency to handle the phone calls or review the mails) would only need to act as translator/interpreter to pass the complaints/concerns to the counsellors/advisors of this group, (so naturally they would have a good degree of Chinese language ability at least to communicate the problem to the counsellors/advisors). the foreign volunteers will act as the bridge of communication between the complainant and the advisors will have solid legal training. This is not a membership association as Mr. Hartzell suggested, this is one that should be (or already has been?) sponsored by the government funds to handle issues relating to child abuse, sexual abuse, labor dispute, visa issues, health, welfare, etc. This is simply to open up the services that are already there to the foreigners in Taiwan. In fact, foreign (especially multinational companies, like Boeing, GE, HP) companies with large presence in Taiwan can be approached as sponsors to help pay these volunteers’ Bien Dan or Car and Horse Expenses. Rolls Royce may want to register quickly to start building good corporate image here…
Two quick questions to Hartzell:
You said "Why is there no respect for the international human rights standards here? Because the government has no legal authority, and is always trying to find ways to stress that it does have legal authority, and so wastes incredible time on all these non-issues. "
How to you arrive at the conclusion “that … the government has no legal authority” ? If this is indeed the case why bother to follow the law? If this is true then we can all toss our ARCs, drive without a permit, run down the street naked…it doesn’t matter the government has no legal authority to arrest us or deport us. I would like to be the first one to suggest that you test this theory for the rest of us. And please send us a postcard from where ever they send you.
Second - on this new group you are proposing … who would be the Taiwanese lawyers that would join to offer legal advice to the members?
This is the kind of detail I’d like to know, too. How many people does Hartzell envision working / volunteering for the association, where will they come from, where will Kennedy’s desk be, etc.
