Kennedy misses the mark
Some time ago your columnist Brian Kennedy wrote a surreal column attacking the burning of ghost money because of the fire risk involved. At the time I attributed his dereliction of duty and gross contempt of a deeply-felt religious practice of Taiwanese people to a fit of pique.
But his column ("`Soft talk, big stick' the only policy," Sept. 13, page 8) confirms my suspicions and seriously compromises Kennedy's claim to human rights advocacy.
Apart from the ludicrousness of quoting that classic anti-establishment figure, Malcolm X, in rhetorically framing future US-sanctioned violence in response to this week's events Kennedy dares to salute Israel for its conduct in recent years, conduct which has included the legalized torture of criminal suspects. He also regards that state as "an example well worth following" in dealing with security matters. This is a recipe for unending catastrophe. What's next, Brian? A pat on the back and a bouquet for Ariel Sharon?
Suicidal terrorists are fueled by righteous indignation and their belief in pursuing a cause to death is the reason why they are so profoundly dangerous. The weapons they can now carry are microscopic, and can cause human damage in numbers exponentially greater than that experienced in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania.
So, without understanding the complexity of world conflict, without noting the enduring lack of interest of Americans in the conduct of their government overseas and without cooperation from most Islamic and Arab states, it is hard to see how any amount of future US government chest-thumping will prevent these and future terrorists from doing this all over again.
Averting future tragedy on a colossal scale requires wisdom at every level, not just that relating to intelligence collection and dropping smart bombs. As we enter a new era of insecurity and sorrow, Kennedy would do well to read the admirably sober Taipei Times editorial accompanying his article and try to transcend sloganeering and name-dropping.
Martin Williams
Taipei
We must fight hatred
The horrific terrorist attacks in the US are a poignant warning to human civilization. What is the aim of civilization? If we are guided by hatred, there is no light at the end of the tunnel for our exploration of civilization. I was shocked, like others. Do we have enough modern tools to eliminate hatred and improve the lives of all humans?
The US is not alone in its tragic encounter. The elites all over the world should together think up a way to handle our real enemy: hatred. Terrorists have become the cheap, horrific alternative to atomic weapons.
Ni Kuojung
Hsinchu City
No `old immigrants'
I read Taitzer Wang's (
However, I'd like to point out his use of the misleading terms "old and new immigrants." There can be only new immigrants, not old ones. The offspring of new immigrants are all natives, just as my parents are new immigrants from Taiwan but I am a native-born American. I am not an immigrant in any normal sense of the word. It has been my understanding that the Aboriginals and those who were born in Taiwan are all native Taiwanese, and only those who were born in China and later came to Taiwan are immigrants.
Tessa Hildebrand
Littleton, Colorado
`Jihad' is misunderstood
It was quite surprising how Chen Shin-min (
Being a Muslim, I've never come across jihad being used for the purpose of "spreading the teachings of Allah."
Sure, it may be about the protection of religion but it is more about the protection of national populations, protection of land resources and ensuring that the country exists in peace.
Jihad can only be applied in a country where the main religion is Islam and the law is based on the Shariah, which is Islamic law. To "spread the teachings of Islam," the fundamental rule in Islam is not to inflict pain or cause massacres.
Muslims are not allowed to "Bible-thump" or bribe a person into religion because it is a sin to do so. The reason for this is that to do so is to insult Islam rather than promote it. This is clearly documented.
If Muslim countries were intolerant of other religions then why do I see churches, synagogues and temples in those countries?
Jihad is clearly what the declaration of war is today. Any outside force that decides to come in, cause massacres and force you to change your beliefs, then that country has the right to declare a Jihad, which, trans-lated, means "struggle."
Yahya Saeed
Birmingham, UK
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
They did it again. For the whole world to see: an image of a Taiwan flag crushed by an industrial press, and the horrifying warning that “it’s closer than you think.” All with the seal of authenticity that only a reputable international media outlet can give. The Economist turned what looks like a pastiche of a poster for a grim horror movie into a truth everyone can digest, accept, and use to support exactly the opinion China wants you to have: It is over and done, Taiwan is doomed. Four years after inaccurately naming Taiwan the most dangerous place on
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
RSS