This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 211.30.205.254 (talk) at 02:36, 2 September 2005. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 02:36, 2 September 2005 by 211.30.205.254 (talk)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)It has a strong pro-Falun Gong and anti-Chinese bias. I don't have the knowledge to work on it. Superm401 | Talk July 3, 2005 21:50 (UTC)
"authorities state that he was actually born on July 7, 1952, and that he lied about his birthdate so that it would be the same as Buddhism's founder Sakyamuni."
This sentence might be leading people into believing this to be true.
In reality Li Hongzhi said himself that he changed his birthdate only because it was messed up durring the cultural revolution and quote: "It's natural that when people want to smear you, they will dig out whatever they can to destroy you. What's the big deal about having the same birthday as Sakyamuni? Many criminals were also born on that date. I have never said that I am Sakyamuni. I am just a very ordinary man."
(from the TIME interview that's now linked in the entry, and hopefully stays linked because it's kind of important to clarify messed up issues like this one)
And also it sounds like the april 25. event would have lead to the persecution. But the VERY reason for that gathering was that a couple of dozen Falun Gong practitioners where arrested when they where complaining about that article written by a relative of Luo Gan (the now head of the 610 office) and run in a party controlled magazine. Also the Falun Gong books (which originally where published by the government itself) where suddenly banned. So all that happened BEFORE april 25. So wouldn't that mean that the party prepared to persecute them even before any of those gatherings happened?
And there is another reason for why the sentence "As a result of such action, (mass gatherings) Falun Gong was outlawed in China, and many practitioners were sent to jail" is wrong.
In China if one wants to send somebody to jail he has to be given a trial. Even if its only a show trial it's still kind of difficult to twist the facts around in such manner as to make it appear justified why a man gets sentenced to like 18 years imprisonment only because he has been sitting on tiananmen square and crossing his legs to do that meditation exercise or something.
So with so many Falun Gong people being detained the vast, vast majority have not at all been sentenced to jail but to "re-education-through-labor camps." That penalty system can hold way more people and is constantly being expanded. It's way more convienient to send a Falun Gong guy there because the "re-education System" allows somebody to be detained in a forced labor camp for up to 3 years WITHOUT having to give him any trial or anything. And even when those three years are over, they can just put him in a brain washing class (they are really called that) for a couple of weeks and then put him back in the labor camp for another 3 years, and they still won't have to give him a trial, and don't even have to tell him why he was sent there.
(what I just mentioned is all backed up by human rights organisations, and i can provide you with the relevant texts, or you can just contact Amnesty International or any other organisation like that)
So I really think it should be changed from jail to labor camps because that's the way those commies do it.
So I wanna emphasize what I said in the discussion page of the entry on Falun Gong: Stating half of what Falun Gong and half of what the communist Propaganda says as fact really isn't the way NPOV works!
I mean really... are you guys really sure you know what you are talking about? After all this ISN'T China. Just because you heared something on TV or somewhere doesn't necasseraly qualify you to write an encyclopedia entry about it, and that's particularly true if you got like the entire Ministry of Propaganda of the biggest Nation in the world cranking out all its resources to confuse precissly that issue!
But of course you would say "what I watched there on TV or read in that magazine was something researched by a westerner, so it should allready be way more reliable than what is on chinese TV."
Right, but the Chinese Government also knows that if only they say it, westerners won't buy it, and besides those western reporters too might have thought that NPOV requires half of his article to state what the Chinese Government says as fact. (-:
"Li Hongzhi currently resides at a mansion..." According to what I know he just lives in a flat with his family in Chinatown. Also in the entry about Falun Gong it says he lives in Brooklyn. Where exept in all those Anti-Falun Gong articles that where published in party controlled chinese newspapers does it say that he lives at a mansion?
"He owns a number of publishers, including Universe Publishing, printing mainly books on Falun Gong."
Strange... as far as i know the owner of The Universe Publishing Company is a women. It's true though that they publish Falun Gong books, (among many other publishers who do, but that doesn't mean that they are owned by the authors whose books they are publishing) Where exactly do you have that information from?
"Recently, during an exclusive interview by the pro-Falun Gong newspaper The Epoch Times, Li referred to the persecution of Falun Gong in China as the 'final battle between good and evil', and predicted that the Chinese Communist government will 'fall within six months'. When asked about the stability of China if this ever occurred, Li replied that 'God will prevent any chaos from occurring'."
I searched the through the entire website of the Epoch Times, and NTDTV in severall different languages. I DID find an exclusive interview with Li Hongzhi (http://english.epochtimes.com/news/4-2-4/19346.html) but it doesn't contain anything of what you said.
Same question, what are your sources?
I think you should read the following interview with Li Hongzhi http://www.upholdjustice.org/English.2/G_3.doc
Here is a quote: "One newspaper said I was very rich. If I wanted to have money, you know there are 100 million practitioners. If everyone gave me one dollar, I would be a multi-millionaire. However, I have never asked for one cent of their money."
I know... you don't belive it because it contradicts those things that the party says about Li Hongzhi, and you would say that he only said this because he wants people to believe that. But than again why should he say it this way in on place and say the exact opposite in another?
Besides... even if he would be rich... so what? Didn't the party claim that he made millions by selling Zhuan Falun? That's not true. But even if it would be, what would be wrong with that? Really whats point? It's the Leader of the Communist Party who started the persecution of Falun Gong, and it's because of him that they came up with all those accusations. But actually it's communism that claims that it would make all people equal. But how come it's no secret that it is the communist leaders themselves who have even more private money than many of the elected politicians in a capitalistic society?
Have you noticed that basicly every single thing that the Chinese Communist Party has accused Li Hongzhi of, is instead something that they started doing themselves a long time ago?
Now they are basicly blaming Li Hongzhi for all of that. History is constantly re-written, and so "the party stays always right".
Manuel- 24.July 2005
- Several points:
- 1. Not everyone who questions Li or Falungong is automatically a "commie."
- 2. Many of us (myself, for one) are indeed qualified to write and edit articles on qigong (which is what Falungong is claimed to be), and to evaluate the efficacy and provenance of different styles and their claims.
- 3. Li has a questionable history of, shall we say, "unconventional" claims about himself amd Falungong and secrecy concerning the origins of those claims.
- Now, indvivdual aspects of the article can be questioned, and perhaps be qualified, but the article itself isn't going to become a shrine to Li. The guy isn't an open book, and the secrecy that he has surrounded himself with, and the public speculation about it, is a notable aspect of his biography. Fire Star 14:40, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
Sorry Fire Star, but you seem to be avoiding all the specific issues here. I have prooven to you (see interview in TIME) that Li Hongzhi stated himself that he is not Buddha Sakyamuni.
I have also looked up the website of the "Universe Publishing Co." I am now sure that it is NOT owned by Li Hongzhi. If necessarry I will contact the real owner, and ask him to confirm that no parts of the company are owned by Li Hongzhi.
Also if necessary I could could collect evidence for you or a 3. party that the CCP already planed the persecution of Falun Gong before the gathering on Tiananmen Square on April 25. 1999.
Also, I could proofe that it has been backed up by the UN Human Rights Commission that hundreds of thouands of practitioners where send to forced labor camps (not jails,)millions persecuted, and thousands killed. Futhermore all major Human Rights Organisations in the West have found Falun Gong to be completely paecfull. I could also provide some quotes regarding that.
All I did was removing the statements in the article that in my view I can proove to be "commie Propaganda" (that doesn't meen you have to be a commie *lol* just that the statements you put in there are :-)
All I did was removing statements that i can proofe to be wrong. In what way was I making a "shrine to Li Hongzhi" ????!
If you are unwilling to have anything in that entry that does not confirm to your allready formed view about Li Hongzhi, than it would be obvious to me that it is necessary to find an administrator who is able to do so. After all I do not think that a place to spread those things is what Misplaced Pages was ment to be. You might not be a "commie" but that doesn't change the fact that what you put in there IS Communist Propaganda.
Oh and Li Hongzhi is Honorary Citizen of many U.S. Cities and many Cities in the U.S. also have a so called "Li Hongzhi Day", and he was also nominated for the Nobel Peace Price multiple times. In what way does he have a "questionable history"? please be more specific.
You said that you where quallified to write an encyclopedia entry on such an issue, yet I asked you severall times for you sources, yet you did not answer me. Well so please tell me if the Party controlled media is not your only source, what is?
Manuel PS: I am not signed in because for some reason I can only sign in with my name on the German Misplaced Pages. But I DO put my name under everything, so if there is an article without it, it is not mine.
- Li is my source. I'm not avoiding anything, we simply disagree. To say I am avoiding issues here is an unworthy tactic. To say that I am a mouthpiece for Chinese Communist propaganda is also an unworthy tactic. I am unwilling to have any article turned into a worshipful screed. You are going to have to deal with me on terms of editorial content, and not with facile political name calling. Please see our civility policy, which isn't optional.
- Despite what you claim, I am not working for the Communists, I am working just with what Li himself has said publicly. I have a personal opinion of Li, certainly. Do I say what it is in the articles? No. A good Misplaced Pages editor simply reports the available facts and lets the readers decide for themselves.
- As far as I am concerned, the following issues in what you say are outstanding:
- 1. Li's "secrecy" inheres in his not naming the provenance of any teachers he may have had in the Time Asia interview, for starters.
- 2. I never said he said he was Shakyamuni Buddha. In the 2003 speech by Li linked to the article he implies that he is beyond the level of a Buddha. That is a notable public statement. what else is notable is that he is accused by the Chinese of changing his birthdate in order to associate himself in the public imagination with Shakyamuni.
- 3. I have removed the statement about Universal Publishing, as I could find no source for the statement.
- So there you have it. I'd be happy to discuss this with any other editors that you care to bring in, admin or not. Regards, Fire Star 22:12, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Hi Fire, You said: "Do I say what it is in the articles? (my personal opinion) No. A good Misplaced Pages editor simply reports the available facts and lets the readers decide for themselves."
If that is so, why don't you put the sppech of Li Hongzhi that I dug up (http://www.upholdjustice.org/English.2/G_3.doc) next to the speech that you dug up?
I would like to remind you of what i wrote to you:
""Recently, during an exclusive interview by the pro-Falun Gong newspaper The Epoch Times, Li referred to the persecution of Falun Gong in China as the 'final battle between good and evil', and predicted that the Chinese Communist government will 'fall within six months'. When asked about the stability of China if this ever occurred, Li replied that 'God will prevent any chaos from occurring'."
I searched through the entire website of the Epoch Times, and NTDTV in severall different languages. I DID find an exclusive interview with Li Hongzhi (http://english.epochtimes.com/news/4-2-4/19346.html) but it doesn't contain anything of what you said.
Same question, what are your sources?"
It's been severall weeks now, but you have neither given a response regarding that, nor have you removed it from the entry.
Yet you say:
"I'm not avoiding anything, we simply disagree. To say I am avoiding issues here is an unworthy tactic"
Well what do call that then? Ignoring? isn't that the same?
Oh ofcourse you also said: "Li is my source."
Well than why don't you put the link to the Epoch Times Article in which he said that directly into the entry?
As I said I was unable to find it anywhere, i would be very happy if you could provide me with a link to that article which you obvously must have read on the epochtimes website yourself..
Sincerely Manuel
Transferred from Manuel's latest anonymous IP talk page
Greetings Manuel.
I responded to two of your objections by taking out the mansion and the publishing company. I could just as easily accuse you of "ignoring" that, but that would be small of me. If you look at the edit history, most of the things you are complaining about were put in by other editors. The birthday thing, for example. Someone else put that in. However, The BBC reports that the Chinese govt. claims that Li lied about his birthdate to imitate Shakyamuni. Do we say Li lied? No. We say the Chinese govt. says Li lied. That is notable enough to stay in the article, even though I didn't contribute it. To object to an objective report of something another, notable, party said about the subject bespeaks a certain partisanship on your part. We don't want any article turned into a love-fest. Please read up on relevant Misplaced Pages policy. So, things without provenance can be taken out, things with provenance can't be taken out, as simple as that. You've shown a history of wanting to take out anything that you perceive as reflecting negatively on Li. That is reason (for me at least) to somewhat discount what you are saying to me right there, because (also since it is the only article you seem to ever work on) you seem to have an agenda outside of the encyclopaedia.
So, for what I put in, these are my sources:
I hope this helps, Fire Star 17:11, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
- The Epoch Times link no longer goes to the citation article (which it formerly did), and since I can't find the quote, I will remove the last paragraph as unsupported until a reliable citation can be found. Fire Star 17:26, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
No... I don't at all want to "turn the entry in a love-fest for Li Hongzhi".
If i would i have mentioned that Li Hongzhi was nominated for nobel-peace-price in 2001 and 2002 each time by severall hundred independant professors. Not to mention the awards he recieved from the New York State counsel, the Governor of Houston, and the all those "Li Hongzhi" days that have been proclaimed by the governors of other U.S. cities.
There are actually a couple of hundreds such awards for him. see:http://www.clearwisdom.net/emh/special_column/recognition.html#usa (there are scans, of each award on the site, so even though this is a website run by Falun Gong practitioners, those awards are not... what is interesting is that there are also some from the Chinese Government... prior to 1999 of course)
Even though i'd say those things ARE of provenance i did not put in any of that, and i am not going to either. It's just that i DO know something about this subject, and i WAS making an effort to remove the things that I know for sure to be lies made up after the persecution. That is my only motive.
Manuel
- Well, that's fair enough. We don't have to remove the "lies" though, if we report them neutrally, saying things like "the Chinese government claims" or "Li Hongzhi claims" we will be doing alright. Like I said before, when the contributors didn't provide, and I couldn't find, any provenance whatever for some of the statements about Li that used to be in the article - zip - out they went. Just as most people I know take Li's public pronouncements with a grain of salt, anyone with access to a relatively free press should realise by now that the Chinese communists aren't the most reliable source either. As long as we couch the respective parties' actual claims with neutral conditioning language and the proper editorial caveats about their actual provability we will be OK. Regards, Fire Star 20:07, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
(http://www.rickross.com/reference/fa_lun_gong/falun249.html)
Two years ago, San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown signed a proclamation decreeing July 23, 1999, Li Hongzhi Day, but a ceremony was canceled abruptly. P.J. Johnston, Brown's press secretary, would not say why Brown changed course. Both he and a Chinese consular official said there was no pressure.
Falun Gong has also garnered high-visibility support for a loftier cause: getting Li nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize. In January, four Bay Area members of Congress, Democratic Reps. Tom Lantos, Anna Eshoo, Zoe Lofgren and Pete Stark, joined 41 other lawmakers in signing a letter that praised Li for promoting the highest humanitarian values.
Mr. Li believes that by consistently pursuing truth, showing compassion, and practicing tolerance, an oppressed people will embrace a morally and practically sound method to purify their own minds and to resolve conflicts in any kind of society, said the letter, which was circulated by Rep. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio.
When the Mercury News asked the Bay Area legislators whether they knew about Li's views on homosexuals and race before they signed the letter, three said no.
Obviously I wouldn't recommend to the Nobel Institute someone who's anti-gay, because that's a human right, Eshoo said.
She subsequently rescinded her nomination, writing to the Nobel Institute that while practitioners deserve freedom of speech, belief and assembly, Mr. Li has made statements that are offensive to me and are counter to many of my core beliefs.
Li, whom followers refer to by the Chinese honorific master, formerly lived in Queens, New York. His current location is not known. He owns Universe Publishing, a private New Jersey company that sells his books, videos and practice tapes.
Li says he will personally install falun (a wheel of law) in his followers' abdomens. He also says practicing Falun Gong unleashes supernatural powers, reverses the effects of aging and prevents illness -- although not if you strive for such results. Mental patients and the mentally retarded cannot practice, he says.
Followers do not pay dues and are linked by the Internet, where new Li statements appear every few weeks, along with news updates and a running tally of persecuted victims in China.