So “2630” has been on an official hunger strike for at least a week. I’m referring, of course, to the political artist formerly known as Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), now known fondly by his detention center number.
Yes, the former president has gone from commander-in-chief to complainer-in-clinker. And following the lead of fellow alleged bribee, Yunlin County Commissioner Su Chih-fen (蘇治芬), to protest the alleged political persecution against him, he ain’t eatin’ nothin’ — not even a tiny bite.
These days that’s no real sacrifice, of course, since most of the stuff on the shelves is China-made, melamine-soaked druck that will give you kidney stones bigger than the bubble-tea tapioca balls from the Shida night market.
These days your odds of good health are probably better on a hunger strike than off.
According to Reuters, Chen was finally hospitalized after 108 hours of non-eating. Said the wire service:
“A doctor on Wednesday determined he was fit enough to return to jail, prosecutor’s spokesman Chen Yun-nan [陳雲南] said.
“‘Our employees will encourage him to eat normally,’ he said.
“But the ex-president will continue to refuse food, his lawyer Cheng Wen-lung [鄭文龍] said, and he is not afraid of dying.”
If he’s really not afraid of dying, he ought to prove it by tucking into a pile of China-made cookies. Now that might convince me he’s innocent.
The snarky cable TV media pointed out how much more comfortable the hospital is then the Tucheng detention center, thus suggesting A-bian was overacting in order to score better digs, as the Filipinos say.
So what will the political fallout of Chen’s case be? That brings us to Vapid Rent-a-Quote of the week, hereby awarded to Tamkang University’s Alexander Huang (黃介正), for the following zinger in Reuters.
Huang allowed: “I have limited knowledge of whether the case would be a minus or a plus for the 2009 elections.”
Wow. Thanks, H-dog, that’s real helpful.
Meanwhile, nearly three weeks into their impassioned protest, the youthful “Wild Strawberries” are looking more and more like the “Wild Dingleberries.” Which is to say, for Ma’s government, they’re irritating, embarrassing and difficult to remove — but, in the larger scheme of things, inconsequential.
This is not to downplay the enthusiasm of these kids. Kudos to them for standing up ... er, sitting down, for Taiwan’s democracy, and putting Ma on notice that he needs to avoid the temptation of reverting to his authoritarian roots. The ’Berries are watching you, buddy.
But what’s with their demands? An apology from Ma and Premier Liu Chao-shiuan (劉兆玄) for police misconduct and revision of the Parade and Assembly Law?
First off, being prez means never having to say you’re sorry — unless the political benefits outweigh the costs, that is. Second, Ma’s government also favors a degree of revision of the parade law, which kind of takes the bite out of that one.
Again, I love these kids’ pro-liberty spirit, but they’re looking increasingly like that unmade James Dean sequel, “Rebels Without a Well-Thought-Through Cause.”
If you’re going to sit in the rain for a couple weeks — which sucks, by the way — why not put some real teeth on your demands? Like, pizza for every Taiwanese citizen on Wednesdays?
Seriously, though, how about following up on one foreign academic’s suggestion and demanding an independent, blue-ribbon panel of legal experts to investigate the recent Arrest-a-Thon of Democratic Progressive Party figures?
Even more significant, the ’Berries should demand the scrapping of the right to hold anyone without charge for up to four months. As it stands, Taiwanese prosecutors, given a local court’s approval, can jail incommunicado anyone they see fit — thus creating mini-Guantanamo Bays (minus water-boarding) across our good island.
We can call it the “Chabuduo Archipelago.” As in: “Well, they’re probably guilty, so let’s just lock them up until we can figure out exactly why, and maybe we can get the media and talkshow crackpots to find the evidence.”
Alarmingly retro for a 21st-century democracy, don’t you think? Most of my drinking buddies didn’t even know Taiwan’s prosecutors could do this — until the recent detention-fest.
Prosecutors say they need to put suspects in the slammer without charge to prevent them from colluding with other suspects. In other words, they don’t want their pesky targets running around actually talking to other people — as if they were members of a free country with civil liberties or something.
What this means is that old Johnny could be locked up just for writing this column — while prosecutors spend two months locating a translation of “dingleberries” to determine if my use thereof constitutes a criminal act.
But back to Chen. The former prez’s prison diet hasn’t stopped his yappin’. According to the rag now staining your fingers, Chen’s lawyer said Chen had asked about the stock market (“How much money did I lose this week?”), and criticized Ma’s plan to save the economy with vouchers.
Yes, in case you haven’t heard, our economy is contracting faster than a man’s privates after a December dip in the Tamsui. To reverse this alarming trend, we’re all going to get NT$3,600 in vouchers, hopefully by Jan. 19, to spend as we please — on Taiwan Beer, betel nuts, hardcore pornography, whatever.
If all goes to plan, this will give our sadsack economy the swift kick in the keister it so badly needs.
I was thinking of splurging on a new winter-sweater-slash-drool-absorber for the house canine Punkspleen. Unfortunately, my Green Island-wandering gal Cathy Pacific, otherwise known as Household Finances Dominatrix, has already spoken for my bit. Apparently there’s a new “Coach” bag out and her own NT$3,600 won’t cover it.
But what’s 2630 going to do with his vouchers? He’s not eating, so he won’t be able to spend it on Taike Doritos or melamine wafers. Maybe some decoration for his cell — a dark green throwrug, perhaps?
If he’s smart, he’ll donate his NT$3,600 to the Wild Strawberries. Sad to say, this may be his only hope of walking free before Lunar New Year.
Got something to tell Johnny? Go on, get it off your chest. Write to dearjohnny@taipeitimes.com, but be sure to put “Dear Johnny” in the subject line or he’ll mark your bouquets and brickbats as spam.
On May 7, 1971, Henry Kissinger planned his first, ultra-secret mission to China and pondered whether it would be better to meet his Chinese interlocutors “in Pakistan where the Pakistanis would tape the meeting — or in China where the Chinese would do the taping.” After a flicker of thought, he decided to have the Chinese do all the tape recording, translating and transcribing. Fortuitously, historians have several thousand pages of verbatim texts of Dr. Kissinger’s negotiations with his Chinese counterparts. Paradoxically, behind the scenes, Chinese stenographers prepared verbatim English language typescripts faster than they could translate and type them
More than 30 years ago when I immigrated to the US, applied for citizenship and took the 100-question civics test, the one part of the naturalization process that left the deepest impression on me was one question on the N-400 form, which asked: “Have you ever been a member of, involved in or in any way associated with any communist or totalitarian party anywhere in the world?” Answering “yes” could lead to the rejection of your application. Some people might try their luck and lie, but if exposed, the consequences could be much worse — a person could be fined,
Taiwan aims to elevate its strategic position in supply chains by becoming an artificial intelligence (AI) hub for Nvidia Corp, providing everything from advanced chips and components to servers, in an attempt to edge out its closest rival in the region, South Korea. Taiwan’s importance in the AI ecosystem was clearly reflected in three major announcements Nvidia made during this year’s Computex trade show in Taipei. First, the US company’s number of partners in Taiwan would surge to 122 this year, from 34 last year, according to a slide shown during CEO Jensen Huang’s (黃仁勳) keynote speech on Monday last week.
When China passed its “Anti-Secession” Law in 2005, much of the democratic world saw it as yet another sign of Beijing’s authoritarianism, its contempt for international law and its aggressive posture toward Taiwan. Rightly so — on the surface. However, this move, often dismissed as a uniquely Chinese form of legal intimidation, echoes a legal and historical precedent rooted not in authoritarian tradition, but in US constitutional history. The Chinese “Anti-Secession” Law, a domestic statute threatening the use of force should Taiwan formally declare independence, is widely interpreted as an emblem of the Chinese Communist Party’s disregard for international norms. Critics
RSS