Over the weekend, pirate radio stations in southern Taiwan reportedly aired malicious remarks aimed at Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (
There is no proof so far that the threatening remarks were made, with an initial report by the Cabinet-level National Communications Commission (NCC) indicating that the words "to assassinate" or "to kill" were not heard on the programs. But KMT legislators were quick to jump to their feet to lambaste the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) administration for "permissively allowing death threats under the pretense of freedom of expression."
The pro-China media has been eager to play up the unverified reports, running them on the hour for the past few days. The issue of Ma's safety is suddenly the nation's top concern, while callers to underground radio stations -- who are usually known for their pro-independence stance -- are in the meantime being described as "barbaric" people who "opt for the use of violence." The pan-blues are trying to paint all callers to pirate radio stations with the same brush, despite lacking any substantiated information on when the death threats were made and on what channel.
The pan-blues demanded that Premier Su Tseng-chang (
The Kaohsiung Prosecutors' office was quick to respond, launching an investigation on Tuesday into the matter. The NCC said that it would move to assist the police in investigating the alleged calls to "assassinate" Ma.
The use of violence is unacceptable. And yes, it is important to take precautions against any rhetoric that might be turned into action and endanger the security and well-being of the nation's leaders. But what about the brazen, violent rhetoric from Ma himself? Unlike the unsubstantiated rumors of threats on underground radio stations, Ma's comments were aired for all to see on the nation's TV news stations. Apparently, to the country's pro-China media and some of the nation's prosecutors, some lives are more valuable than others.
Why didn't prosecutors express concern when Ma, while noting earlier this month that the opposition would only get one shot at recalling the president, brazenly incited the public by saying: "It's time to load the gun, but not yet time to pull the trigger"? Why hasn't the media been more critical after Ma on Wednesday urged Chen to take the initiative to resign instead of being recalled, warning him that he would "die a horrible death" if he didn't do so?
And NCC members have seemingly fallen asleep and missed the far more violent words such as "execute A-bian" and "kill [former president] Lee Teng-hui (李登輝)" which are often yelled in public by pro-unification diehards, posted on the People First Party's online forum and aired on a certain TVBS talk show program.
It appears that the only relevant difference here is the color of one's political affiliation.
A day after charges were filed against him by a group of DPP Tainan City councilors for "inciting others to kill," Ma yesterday offered an apology for his violent remarks.
The nation's pro-China media will hopefully put aside their partisan sentiments and stop applying double standards to the pan-green and pan-blue camps. Ma, as leader of the nation's largest opposition party, should set a good example, instead of adding to the nation's bitter political atmosphere. What the country needs now is less hatred and more rationality.
From the Iran war and nuclear weapons to tariffs and artificial intelligence, the agenda for this week’s Beijing summit between US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) is packed. Xi would almost certainly bring up Taiwan, if only to demonstrate his inflexibility on the matter. However, no one needs to meet with Xi face-to-face to understand his stance. A visit to the National Museum of China in Beijing — in particular, the “Road to Rejuvenation” exhibition, which chronicles the rise and rule of the Chinese Communist Party — might be even more revealing. Xi took the members
After Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) met Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing, most headlines referred to her as the leader of the opposition in Taiwan. Is she really, though? Being the chairwoman of the KMT does not automatically translate into being the leader of the opposition in the sense that most foreign readers would understand it. “Leader of the opposition” is a very British term. It applies to the Westminster system of parliamentary democracy, and to some extent, to other democracies. If you look at the UK right now, Conservative Party head Kemi Badenoch is
A Pale View of Hills, a movie released last year, follows the story of a Japanese woman from Nagasaki who moved to Britain in the 1950s with her British husband and daughter from a previous marriage. The daughter was born at a time when memories of the US atomic bombing of Nagasaki during World War II and anxiety over the effects of nuclear radiation still haunted the community. It is a reflection on the legacy of the local and national trauma of the bombing that ended the period of Japanese militarism. A central theme of the movie is the need, at
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) on Friday used their legislative majority to push their version of a special defense budget bill to fund the purchase of US military equipment, with the combined spending capped at NT$780 billion (US$24.78 billion). The bill, which fell short of the Executive Yuan’s NT$1.25 trillion request, was passed by a 59-0 margin with 48 abstentions in the 113-seat legislature. KMT Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文), who reportedly met with TPP Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌) for a private meeting before holding a joint post-vote news conference, was said to have mobilized her
RSS