Forced abortions in China

[mr friendly guy]

This is lies too. You can have more than one child if you're willing to pay enough money or bribe the local officials, and even if you don't, they don't force abortions on people - they just don't provide the child with a hukou.

I'm hardly one to defend O'Donnell but forced abortions have and do happen in China.

Link 1

Link 2

But it is unfair to label it as the country as a whole, which seems to be what O'Donnel is doing given that its against the law as laid down by China's highest authority (the central government) and they are now rare (from your first article) and due to officials breaking said law but managing to avoid being caught.

[The Spartan]

they just don't provide the child with a hukou.

What does this mean, exactly? I understand it's some kind of registration, but what happens if someone doesn't get one?

[Zed]

As I understand it, one of the effects is that you don't get to go to school.

[The Kernel]

But it is unfair to label it as the country as a whole, which seems to be what O'Donnel is doing

She says it happens in China which is a factual statement, and this is certainly not an isolated case.

given that its against the law as laid down by China's highest authority (the central government)

Bullshit. Instead of arresting the officials responsible, China has instead arrested a lawyer trying to provide legal assistance to forced abortion victims. You are so full of shit it is coming out of your ears.

and they are now rare (from your first article) and due to officials breaking said law but managing to avoid being caught.

There have been thousands of these cases documented and those are just the ones we know about. And the Chinese government has done nothing except arrest those who try to protest against it and help the victims.

So you done being an apologist?

[mr friendly guy]

But it is unfair to label it as the country as a whole, which seems to be what O'Donnel is doing

She says it happens in China which is a factual statement, and this is certainly not an isolated case.

That's funny, I could of sworn I accused her of labelling the country as a whole for doing this rather than denying that it does happen. Thanks for showing you can't read. Now go back to playing with your strawmen.

given that its against the law as laid down by China's highest authority (the central government)

Bullshit. Instead of arresting the officials responsible, China has instead arrested a lawyer trying to provide legal assistance to forced abortion victims. You are so full of shit it is coming out of your ears.

The very article you linked to earlier stated it was forbidden by the central government. Again in all these China threads you display the ability to read over what someone writes, especially when that someone doesn't bash China as much as you do.

and they are now rare (from your first article) and due to officials breaking said law but managing to avoid being caught.

There have been thousands of these cases documented and those are just the ones we know about. And the Chinese government has done nothing except arrest those who try to protest against it and help the victims.

The very article you linked to mentioned it was rare. To wit.

Along with forced sterilization and other coercive methods of birth control, forced abortion continues to be practiced occasionally by officials in remote parts of China despite its having been banned by the central government in Beijing.

So what we have here is a whiner who a) doesn't read his own linked articles, and b) ignores parts of the article which doesn't suit him.
I guess Time magazine is only correct when it supports your view and me quoting from it must mean its also "full of shit its coming out of the ears". Man, somewhere out there a concept is being stolen.

The Time magazine article is quite informative and explains why they still persist despite being outlawed by the central government, and is much more nuance than your simplistic BEIJING IS TEH EVIL tone you predominantly take whenever China comes up in a thread.

So you done being an apologist?

Translation, anyone who doesn't agree with your the CCP is the most evillest, nastiest force in the universe must be an apologist.

[The Kernel]

That's funny, I could of sworn I accused her of labelling the country as a whole for doing this rather than denying that it does happen. Thanks for showing you can't read. Now go back to playing with your strawmen.

If I'd said that the US lynched black people in the early 20th century would you have yelled that I was wrong because it only happened in the South? Get a fucking clue.

The very article you linked to earlier stated it was forbidden by the central government. Again in all these China threads you display the ability to read over what someone writes, especially when that someone doesn't bash China as much as you do.

The same central government who supposedly forbids it also threw two lawyers in jail who were trying to draw attention to the issue and provide legal assistance to the victims.

The central government also says there are no human rights abuses in China and that Tienanmen Square did not involve the killing of peaceful protestors, only armed rebels. I guess everything they say is true in your mind.

The very article you linked to mentioned it was rare. To wit.

Rare is a qualitative term, and the Time article is three years old. Thousands of documented cases among a billion plus people can be thought of as "rare" but it's still common enough that calling it "lies" is completely inaccurate.

So what we have here is a whiner who a) doesn't read his own linked articles, and b) ignores parts of the article which doesn't suit him.
I guess Time magazine is only correct when it supports your view and me quoting from it must mean its also "full of shit its coming out of the ears". Man, somewhere out there a concept is being stolen.

Speak for yourself, your entire objection seems to hinge on the "banned from the central government" line, yet none of their actions are in line with trying to stamp out the practice. Are they prosecuting the governors involved in these practices? No, they are just throwing people in jail who try to draw attention to it and help the victims.

Translation, anyone who doesn't agree with your the CCP is the most evillest, nastiest force in the universe must be an apologist.

Nice strawman asshole, got anything useful to add?

[mr friendly guy]

That's funny, I could of sworn I accused her of labelling the country as a whole for doing this rather than denying that it does happen. Thanks for showing you can't read. Now go back to playing with your strawmen.

If I'd said that the US lynched black people in the early 20th century would you have yelled that I was wrong because it only happened in the South? Get a fucking clue.

Oh after all that the chickshit finally deigns to address the point.

If I had said that the US sucks because they have snipers shooting innocent people in the streets you would have said that while the second statement is true, its unfair to use it as an argument pointint how the US is bad because it was the job of two wackos working in the Washington area. While an extreme example it illustrates that there comes a point where something is sufficiently rare that its unfair to use that as an argument to label the whole.

The same central government who supposedly forbids it also threw two lawyers in jail who were trying to draw attention to the issue and provide legal assistance to the victims.

Lets recap for moron boy here.
I claim it was forbidden by the central government because of the article you linked to. Your article.
You claim that was bullshit.
I posted the actual sentence where it said that.
Instead of conceding you know change the topic like a little chickenshit and say while the government isn't trustworthy. Too bad my argument isn't just based on its illegal in China.

The central government also says there are no human rights abuses in China and that Tienanmen Square did not involve the killing of peaceful protestors, only armed rebels.

Too bad its just not the bosses in Beijing saying forced abortions aren't allowed. Its also Western Media sources like the very article you linked to. Its also not just the central government arbitarily saying its not allowed. Its also reports from BBC, Telegraph which shows thousands of people breaking the one child limit through various ways without being subjected to forced abortions. But I bet you are going to dismiss those claims because they don't suit your world view. AM I RITE?

I guess everything they say is true in your mind.

You are fucking dishonest fat turd who uses strawmen because you can't make a case.

Rare is a qualitative term, and the Time article is three years old. Thousands of documented cases among a billion plus people can be thought of as "rare" but it's still common enough that calling it "lies" is completely inaccurate.

Too bad I never said it was a lie. Perhaps you might like to point out where I said that? But you won't even try because you a dishonest fuckwit.

So what we have here is a whiner who a) doesn't read his own linked articles, and b) ignores parts of the article which doesn't suit him.
I guess Time magazine is only correct when it supports your view and me quoting from it must mean its also "full of shit its coming out of the ears". Man, somewhere out there a concept is being stolen.

Speak for yourself,

My statements about you failing to read your own article or ignoring the parts is absolutely true. You called bullshit on a line I quoted verbatim from the article.

your entire objection seems to hinge on the "banned from the central government" line,

My very first post you quoted back would show that my position isn't just hinging on that but also the fact its rare. But reading comprehension isn't your strong point is it?

yet none of their actions are in line with trying to stamp out the practice. Are they prosecuting the governors involved in these practices? No, they are just throwing people in jail who try to draw attention to it and help the victims.

Of course they should enforce their own laws into the remote rural areas where this shit happens as well. The fact that the telegraph article alone reports tens of thousands breaking the one child limit without force abortions and people paying fines to get around it shows that the law is being applied at least in some regions.

Nice strawman asshole, got anything useful to add?

How about anyone who doesn't agree with your one sided analysis, selective quotation mining and expecting words from Christian missionaries to be gospel (hey O'donnel got her top secret info from Christian missionaries) but at the same time consider it ridiculous that someone accepts the word from the other side even when its backed up by other sources, must be an apologist then?

[The Kernel]

Oh after all that the chickshit finally deigns to address the point.

If I had said that the US sucks because they have snipers shooting innocent people in the streets you would have said that while the second statement is true, its unfair to use it as an argument pointint how the US is bad because it was the job of two wackos working in the Washington area. While an extreme example it illustrates that there comes a point where something is sufficiently rare that its unfair to use that as an argument to label the whole.

Thousands of cases of forced abortions which the Chinese refuse to prosecute (done by actual governors not simply private citizens) and are actually working to cover it up and you think the Beltway sniper (which was a single incident by an individual and he was put to death) and you think you have a decent analogy?

The lynching in the South was a far better analogy...one which you completely failed to address and would prefer to just sweep under the rug. I wonder why? Oh right, because it fits this situation perfectly and you are a dishonest little shit.

Lets recap for moron boy here.
I claim it was forbidden by the central government because of the article you linked to. Your article.
You claim that was bullshit.
I posted the actual sentence where it said that.
Instead of conceding you know change the topic like a little chickenshit and say while the government isn't trustworthy. Too bad my argument isn't just based on its illegal in China.

The government not only looks the other way by refusing to enforce the laws in rural areas, it is actually complicit in actions to cover them up. You don't fucking see how this matters?

Too bad its just not the bosses in Beijing saying forced abortions aren't allowed. Its also Western Media sources like the very article you linked to. Its also not just the central government arbitarily saying its not allowed. Its also reports from BBC, Telegraph which shows thousands of people breaking the one child limit through various ways without being subjected to forced abortions. But I bet you are going to dismiss those claims because they don't suit your world view. AM I RITE?

Wow, so not everyone is forced to get an abortion huh? Too bad I never claimed any such thing. But nice strawman you are working on there, keep at it.

You are fucking dishonest fat turd who uses strawmen because you can't make a case.

You seem to have the rhetoric down fine, but your argument is still lacking.

Too bad I never said it was a lie. Perhaps you might like to point out where I said that? But you won't even try because you a dishonest fuckwit.

Your response to me was directed at me correcting Lus in calling it "lies". If you didn't disagree with my correction then you shouldn't have gotten involved.

My statements about you failing to read your own article or ignoring the parts is absolutely true. You called bullshit on a line I quoted verbatim from the article.

I read it just fine, it says that the Beijing government outlaws the practice. However, they have shown no evidence of taking any steps to prevent it and are in fact engaged in an active effort to cover it up.

My very first post you quoted back would show that my position isn't just hinging on that but also the fact its rare. But reading comprehension isn't your strong point is it?

So thousands of documented cases (leaving aside the undocumented ones) is rare in your mind huh? I'll bet you thought lynchings were rare too since the majority of black people didn't get lynched.

Of course they should enforce their own laws into the remote rural areas where this shit happens as well. The fact that the telegraph article alone reports tens of thousands breaking the one child limit without force abortions and people paying fines to get around it shows that the law is being applied at least in some regions.

And hundreds of thousands of black people weren't lynched in the South. Does this mean that lynching wasn't a problem or that it didn't happen?

How about anyone who doesn't agree with your one sided analysis, selective quotation mining and expecting words from Christian missionaries to be gospel (hey O'donnel got her top secret info from Christian missionaries) but at the same time consider it ridiculous that someone accepts the word from the other side even when its backed up by other sources, must be an apologist then?

I'm not even sure what you think you are arguing here. You admit that forced abortions happen on a scale of several thousand cases at least and you aren't disputing that the Chinese government has not only worked to cover it up, but actually threw two lawyers in jail just for trying to help the victims bring those responsible to justice.

So what praytell is your argument here? Mind actually making one that isn't simply bluster?

[mr friendly guy]

Thousands of cases of forced abortions which the Chinese refuse to prosecute (done by actual governors not simply private citizens) and are actually working to cover it up and you think the Beltway sniper (which was a single incident by an individual and he was put to death) and you think you have a decent analogy?

Way to miss the point retard. I pointed out there comes a point when its ridiculous to label the whole when the event isn't frequent enough.

The lynching in the South was a far better analogy...one which you completely failed to address and would prefer to just sweep under the rug. I wonder why? Oh right, because it fits this situation perfectly and you are a dishonest little shit.

Since it flew right over your head I will explain it in small words for your miniscule brain. By that logic any bad thing that happens can be justified with "this country actively makes that happen" no matter how infrequent. The question is how frequent is this going on relative to the population. Rare from your own article.

The government not only looks the other way by refusing to enforce the laws in rural areas, it is actually complicit in actions to cover them up. You don't fucking see how this matters?

Oh Pleeease. Your hyperbole is getting tiresome. The government isn't some fucking Borg unimatrix where everyone jumps when Hu Jintao says something.

Of course it matters. However the point is a) its illegal (which you failed to refute despite saying bullshit multiple times) and b) its not widespread from your very own source. The fact that some aspect of the government cover it up isn't unknown, and an indication that provinces further out manage to ignore dictates from Beijing.

Your entire tactic of changing tact and implying its illegal only in name is bullshit considering most of China follows the law just fine.

Wow, so not everyone is forced to get an abortion huh?

Hence the point that it happens occasionally, as stated from your very own article, moron.

Too bad I never claimed any such thing.

You did however dispute my claim that its unfair to label the whole for something which is rare. You disputed the rare part several times. When I pointed out lots of cases where the law is followed, ie where no forced abortions were done you whine like a little brat and go "I never claimed everyone is forced to get an abortion." Heres a hint, no one claimed you did either. Next you follow up your whining with an accusation of a strawman.

But nice strawman you are working on there, keep at it.
You seem to have the rhetoric down fine, but your argument is still lacking.

So says the guy who calls bullshit on his own article when it doesn't agree with every single aspect of his position.

Your response to me was directed at me correcting Lus in calling it "lies".

By pointing out that O'Donnel was still guilty of utilising a gross generalisation. I didn't accuse her of making a factual error. If you read that part instead of jumping up and down with your impotent rage and going bullshit, bullshit and accusing me of being an apologist (and hence forcing me to respond in kind) you might have notice that. Oh wait. That implies you can actually read. Carry on.

If you didn't disagree with my correction then you shouldn't have gotten involved.

In my very first post to you retard, I stated that I thought her statement was unfair because of a gross generalisation and not because it didn't happen. Ergo her argument is still bullshit, but not for the same reasons Lus gave. I even said it happened because I stated it was rare. Do you even fucking know what that word means? It means it happens, but not frequently (as stated your very own article). If you can't read properly maybe you should go back to your school and ask for a refund.

I read it just fine, it says that the Beijing government outlaws the practice. However, they have shown no evidence of taking any steps to prevent it and are in fact engaged in an active effort to cover it up.

Aside from the fact that most places in China follow the law fine. They could do a better job, but it doesn't change the fact that O'Donnell's statement was generalising.

So thousands of documented cases (leaving aside the undocumented ones) is rare in your mind huh? I'll bet you thought lynchings were rare too since the majority of black people didn't get lynched.
And hundreds of thousands of black people weren't lynched in the South. Does this mean that lynching wasn't a problem or that it didn't happen?

No, but if you made a gross generalisation of it I would object. If you implied parts of the government, re : southern states actively help it in various ways I would not object. If you implied the government as a whole up to the Federal level advocated it, I would object. I am going to hazard a guess (sarcasm) that O'Donnel was refering to the top brass in China, and not some politician stuck in their isolated province when she said we shouldn't be friends with them.

I'm not even sure what you think you are arguing here. You admit that forced abortions happen on a scale of several thousand cases at least and you aren't disputing that the Chinese government has not only worked to cover it up, but actually threw two lawyers in jail just for trying to help the victims bring those responsible to justice.

So what praytell is your argument here? Mind actually making one that isn't simply bluster?

Lets distill it down for your tiny brain
a) Forced abortions is illegal in China (your article)
b) Most of China follows the law in regards to force abortions (from your article again and some numbers shown on my article)
c) O'Donnell is using a gross generalisation on discussing forced abortions when she says "So a country that forces women to have abortions and mandates that you can only have one child and will not allow you the freedom to read the Bible" because of fact a and b.

Oh wait, I said this in my very first post to you dipshit.

For the first point you just waved your hands around like a raving loon calling bullshit to the fact its illegal, which is downright bizarre because your own article stated that. Eventually I quoted from your own article, but like a little whiner you just kept at it. I bet you still haven't conceded that point yet, but apparently you think if something its illegal it must magically can't happen or something since you keep on disputing its illegal by pointing out it happens. And here I thought illegal means its against the law of the land or something.

For the second point you bitch and moan with impotent rage again ignoring your own article when it says its rare and post other links showing more cases and expect your source to be taken as gospel and saying anything the CCP says is rubbish. Hey, I bet if the CCP says the Earth orbits the sun and the sky is blue you would also dispute that too right. After I post links from Western media showing that there are also lots of cases where the law is shock horror, actually followed you then made the startling claim that I somehow, accused you of saying forced abortions happen with everyone and crowing in your orgasmic triumph as you defeated the nasty "apologist" because you never made that statement. Brilliant you are. I am sure Hu Jintao and Wen Jiabao are cowering in their beds right now in fear that you might come and vanquish them and slay the Chicom beast.

For the third point you totally ignored it in favour of saying, but O'Donnel said a factual statement, something I never denied. Once again for you, I challenged her gross generalisation. You can disagree with that, but its a hell of a difference from actually saying forced abortions don't happen. You then act like an offended whinny brat when I point out you can't read.

[The Kernel]

Wow, all that text just to argue over the qualitative definition of "rare" and "generalizing". What a waste of space.

[The Kernel]

Furthermore, the point which you still seem to be blissfully ignoring is that the Chinese government not only looks the other way with regards to forced abortions, it actually actively encourages them through their quotas that they set on births.

The governors of these provinces don't crack down on births for shits and giggles, they do it because they are held accountable to keeping births down and forced abortions are one of the most straightforward methods. Did you ever ask yourself why this only happens in rural areas? Because the birth rates in rural areas (where 80% of the Chinese population lives) is still averaging 2.5 children per person (much higher than in the cities) and the governors tasked with keeping births down have to do so using forced abortions if other measures fail to do so.

It's the central governments use of quotas to determine job performance that make them complicit in this.

[The Kernel]

As for how "rare" this practice is, let's take a look at what Amnesty International has to say on the subject.

Thousands of forced sterilizations in a single province

Local birth quotas, upheld by stiff penalties as well as rewards, play a prominent part in the policy. Reports of coerced abortions and sterilizations have continued and few officials are believed to have been brought to justice or punished for such abuses.

So yes, the policy is forbidden...but it's also reinforced by quotas and the central government does not punish those who use forced abortions and sterilizations as a means of meeting these quotas.

So we have tens of thousands of cases as a lower limit for these practices, but what are the possible upper limits?

Epoch Times

China Daily, a state-controlled newspaper, recently published annual abortion figures of 13 million and a live birth rate of 20 million, as recorded by China’s National Family Planning Commission.

The recent China Daily article, echoed by a BBC report, attributes the high number of abortions to lack of education on contraception. However, experts say that most of the abortions are due to the one child policy.

"[We are] fairly certain most of [the 13 million] are forced abortions," says Colin Mason, who conducted field work in Guangdong and Guangxi Provinces in March this year for the nonprofit Virginia-based Population Research Institute. The two provinces are “models” in China, where the one child policy is strictly enforced and all birth quotas are met. Based on his experience in China, he said most people would have more than one child if they could.

Tens of thousands of cases as a lower limit with millions as an upper limit. You think this is rare?

[Bakustra]

Right. The Population Research Institute, which claims that China has forced "hundreds of millions" of abortions in the past thirty years, calls the One Child Policy a "war against the people of China", which calls their estimate of 400 million unborn children "murders" by the Chinese government, and which advocates unrestricted population growth. I really think that they're an excellent source to be used, and obviously unbiased. They also are anti-abortion in general, and outright Reaganites, though to be fair many Americans are. In fact, they claim that Democrats want to murder, excuse me, euthanize the entire population of the US through healthcare reform. Frankly, your hatred appears to have blinded you.

[The Kernel]

Right. The Population Research Institute, which claims that China has forced "hundreds of millions" of abortions in the past thirty years, calls the One Child Policy a "war against the people of China", which calls their estimate of 400 million unborn children "murders" by the Chinese government, and which advocates unrestricted population growth. I really think that they're an excellent source to be used, and obviously unbiased. They also are anti-abortion in general, and outright Reaganites, though to be fair many Americans are. In fact, they claim that Democrats want to murder, excuse me, euthanize the entire population of the US through healthcare reform. Frankly, your hatred appears to have blinded you.

You are aware of the concept of upper/lower limits yes? The Amnesty International report is more than enough to show that this is not a rare event.

[Bakustra]

Right. The Population Research Institute, which claims that China has forced "hundreds of millions" of abortions in the past thirty years, calls the One Child Policy a "war against the people of China", which calls their estimate of 400 million unborn children "murders" by the Chinese government, and which advocates unrestricted population growth. I really think that they're an excellent source to be used, and obviously unbiased. They also are anti-abortion in general, and outright Reaganites, though to be fair many Americans are. In fact, they claim that Democrats want to murder, excuse me, euthanize the entire population of the US through healthcare reform. Frankly, your hatred appears to have blinded you.

You are aware of the concept of upper/lower limits yes? The Amnesty International report is more than enough to show that this is not a rare event.

An upper limit must still be reasonable, and even if I declared it was an upper limit, using the John Birch Society for anything would still be suspect, just as your wholehearted acceptance of an ideological campaign's beliefs as reasonable.

[The Kernel]

An upper limit must still be reasonable, and even if I declared it was an upper limit, using the John Birch Society for anything would still be suspect, just as your wholehearted acceptance of an ideological campaign's beliefs as reasonable.

If I was trying to defend the millions of forced abortions you might have a point. As it is, I simply pointed out that the likely number is somewhere in between. China still has an abortion-to-birth rate of 65% whereas in the US it is more like 25%.

By the way, it is equally as unreasonable to expect the Beijing government to release numbers on this practice.

[Thanas]

Split from this thread.

[mr friendly guy]

Wow, all that text just to argue over the qualitative definition of "rare" and "generalizing".

Wow dumbshit boy needs to be told 3 times before he understood generalising.

What a waste of space.

What a wonderful one liner riposte to point by point debate. I better concede right about now. But I guess any thing that shows Kernel being a dumbshit is a waste of space.

How to debate like the Kernel.

1. post an article and then call it bullshit when it fails to support everything he says.

So which is it? Either time magazine is bullshit which makes you a fucking idiot for linking to a bullshit article, or its not and you are just being dishonest when you realise it doesn't support everything you say.

I would quote the debating rules to ask you to address the point, but I suspect I will have to wait for your balls to descend before you actually address this point even though its been raised numerous times. That is until the year, say 2050.

2. Accuse Time magazine of being the same as the Chinese Communist party. Mistaking time magazine for the Chinese communist party. A classic attempt at poisoning the well.

I stated that forced abortions are illegal as quoted from your own article arsehole. You then go around and say it came from the CCP and that if I believed that I must believe anything. Even though I quoted to show the relevant passages came from the Time article.

So address the fucking point. Did my quote come from Time magazine or CCP? I only stated at least twice that it came from your own article. Why do you continually avoid this point. I wonder why? Oh I know. You are a chickenshit and gutless coward with less balls then a toy doll.

3. Words have meaning. Just not what the dictionary says they mean.

We are treated to Fat Boy Shit's ranting about forced abortions not actually illegal finally culminating in

So yes, the policy is forbidden

. After all that he finally says yes it is illegal. Talk about a waste of space.

Also in dumbshit boys mind rare = never ever happens, disagree with him = apologist and Beijing = TEH EVIL.

4. Hide behind another poster.

Fat shit accused me of denying forced abortions happen, because apparently rare = never happens in his mind. When I challenged him to show where I said that he retorted that he was replying to Lusankanya, even though she hadn't participated further in this thread after he and I had been going back and forth for a while.

Last time I checked Lusankanya was a thin chick, while Kernel is a morbidly obese fat lump of lard so hiding behind her like that doesn't work. At least have the courage of your convictions to back up what you accuse me of instead of hiding behind another poster.

If you accused me of saying something either provide the evidence or concede, rather than this "oh I was really really replying to someone else" schmickt. Its the mark of a grade A coward.

5. More poisoning of the well

Yes Time magazine is apparent a CCP subsidiary or something. If we believe in the CCP aka Time magazine we would believe anything. Apparently I must believe anything because I believe it when the CCP says China sent a man into space, built kilometres of high speed rail, has the third highest wind farm energy production by country and also made great progress to reforest the Loess Plateau. Clearly those trees planted themselves in such a short space of time.

Whats the betting he will retort with a black / white fallacy, although I should point out I already stated why some claims are more believable than others, but I guess if it takes 3 tries before dumbshit boy understands the concept of generalising, its not surprising he is slow on the uptake.

This poisoning the well attempt is pathetic especially in light of how easy it is to use his own pseudo-logic against him. For example

Kernel is the fat dipshit who not only displayed downright dishonesty in this thread but claimed that the Chinese government was jamming mobile phones in the wake of the 2008 Sichuan earthquake to mask the extent of the tragedy from the outside world.

If you believe him, you must believe annnnythiiiing. Clearly this man is and honest to goodness god fearing Christian who isn't given to flights of fancy or has an axe to grind. No sirreee.

And yes, he actually said that. And no he doesn't deny that he is factually wrong. He will huff and puff but won't actually admit its wrong.

Funny thing is, he himself uses a dubious source to talk about forced abortions and an Amnesty international source talking about sterilisations of people who already have a child rather than forced abortions per se, confined to one province, (of which the numbers of those actually being forced is not given despite his claim of tens of thousands, of which the target they aim to sterilise is not even 10,000, yet alone the tens of thousands he likes claiming). Not that I support forced sterilisations or forced abortions despite being aware of the potential Malthusian trap China and the world has to deal with, but it does illustrate how much of a stretch dumbshit boy will go to support his case, how many numbers he will pull out misread.

The fact is, the fat lump of shit doesn't understand that the world is a bit more complicated than his black & white view of Beijing = TEH EVIL, and when people point this out he gets himself worked up in a self righteous impotent rage. I mean its not like there has never ever been a case of corrupt officials breaking the rule of the land and then misusing their power to get away with it. No sirree. Not that this has anything to do with whether its a gross generalisation or not. Only percentages can, but since he will ignore articles from telegraph or BBC in favour of whatever suits his world view its not surprising we will be stuck with him for a while.



6. Change the topic.

I point out that BBC and other Western media also publishes similar things to what the CCP says, that is forced abortions are illegal and most of the country does not practice it. Instead of acknowledging that or attacking the source if he objects he changes the topic to

Wow, so not everyone is forced to get an abortion huh? Too bad I never claimed any such thing. But nice strawman you are working on there, keep at it

Yep, when you can't argue the point, accuse the other guy or saying something else and then defend that. Does his cowardice knows no bounds?

7. Oh, and just for fun.
Fat lump of shit says that

China still has an abortion-to-birth rate of 65% whereas in the US it is more like 25%.

of which the source he gets from here (as quoted by his fat self)

China Daily, a state-controlled newspaper, recently published annual abortion figures of 13 million and a live birth rate of 20 million, as recorded by China’s National Family Planning Commission.

The recent China Daily article, echoed by a BBC report, attributes the high number of abortions to lack of education on contraception. However, experts say that most of the abortions are due to the one child policy.

"[We are] fairly certain most of [the 13 million] are forced abortions," says Colin Mason, who conducted field work in Guangdong and Guangxi Provinces in March this year for the nonprofit Virginia-based Population Research Institute. The two provinces are “models” in China, where the one child policy is strictly enforced and all birth quotas are met. Based on his experience in China, he said most people would have more than one child if they could.

16 million divided by 20 million gives us 65%. But hang on a minute, the source came from the China Daily a state controlled newspaper echoing something reported by China's National Family Planning commission. Didn't dumbshit boy earlier say

The central government also says there are no human rights abuses in China and that Tienanmen Square did not involve the killing of peaceful protestors, only armed rebels. I guess everything they say is true in your mind.

There you go. I guess if he believes the CCP's figures everything they say is true in his mind. Dumbshit boy disproves himself.

But logic is really hard for him. Not surprising since it took him 3 tries of reading to get it. Next we will be teaching him numbers and how to count.

[Rogue 9]

Also in dumbshit boys mind rare = never ever happens, disagree with him = apologist and Beijing = TEH EVIL.

Beijing is fucking evil, regardless of the contents of this thread. Any government that holds "inciting subversion of state power" (PDF, relevant portion on page 12) as a criminal charge defined by putting words to paper is fucking evil. What's your point?