A Short Zen Story

一隻身上長滿蚤子的狗，在街上流連。每一次躺下來想要休息，它便馬上感到癢得無法忍受，只好起來繼續走。可是它走呀走，總找不到一個不會令它發癢的地方。
垂頭喪氣的問另一隻狗：「怎麼就是沒有一個地方不使我發癢的？」
「走到那裡都是一樣的，要是你不先處理自己身上的蚤子。」

Text from Tiananmen Papers – 12

The Tiananmen Papers: the Chinese leadership’s decision to use force against their own people – in their own words

Edited by Andrew J. Nathan and Perry Link

Ch.2: April 24-30: The April 26 Editoral

[cont'd]

Yuan Mu’s dialogue
Li Peng assigned Yuan Mu and He Dongchang to conduct a dialogue with the students…[Li] instructed them to make a strong defense of the April 26 editorial to protect the prestige of the Party and the state.
At 2.30 P.M. Yuan, He, and two other government representatives received 45 students. Yuan took a hard line through out. There was no serious problem of corruption inside the Party, he said, and Party leaders were reducing expenditures by cancelling the annual Beidaihe meeting at the beach and banning the import of expensive cars. He also denied the existence of a censorship system even though the editor-in-chief of the World Economic Herald had just been fired. Demonstrators in Beijing, Yuan claimed, were manipulated by persons behind the scenes who presented a serious threat. He and his colleagues evaded many of the students’ questions by changing the subject.

Student reaction
The tape of the Yuan Mu dialogue, broadcast on CCTV on the evening of April 29, was not well received. Students took to the streets in protest or demonstrated on their campuses in 23 cities, including Shanghai, Tianjin, Wuhan, Lanzhou, Changchun, Shenyang, Hangzhou, Changsha, Chongqing, Chengdu, and Xi’an.
The State Security Ministry reported that two-thirds of the students on five major Beijing campuses were upset by the dialogue. They complained that the participating students were primarily from the official student groups rather than real representatives of student interests, that the dialogue was not equal, and that Yuan Mu and his colleagues avoided some substantive issues. At a press conference Wang Dan and Wuerkaixi announced on behalf of the Autonomous Federation of Students in the Capital that they rejected the dialogue as phony.

Overseas coverage
On APril 30 the State Security Ministry filed a report with Zhongnanhai summarizing three main themes in foreign reporting on the events of late April:

1. The student movement had become the int’l issue of greatest concern to the Western media. From 16 to 30 April the New York Times carried 18 articles or editorials on China; the Washing post, 16; the Baltimore Sun, 13. The three major TV networks in the U.S.A. each gave the April 27 demonstration two minutes of air time. The press in other Western countries behaved similarly. The slant of the coverage was pro-student, and the media noted the Party’s “loss of control.” Images of smiling policemen, students climbing on military vehicles to explain democracy to the soldiers, and citizens donating cash to the demonstrators created a favorable impression. The foreign press portrayed the government’s acceptance of dialogue as a student victory.
2. The Western media exaggerated the significance of the movement, treating it as a result of deep popular dissatisfaction with the government.
3. Westerners urged the government to avoid repression, to accept the students’ criticisms, and to undertake democratic reforms. ABC television called the Chinese government a paper tiger. The negative Western press response to the APril 26 editorial helped mobilize Chinese students abroad to go to Chinese embassies to protest the editorial. A Washington Post editorial expressed hope for the collapse of communism in China.

轉：逮捕许志永是卑鄙行为

7月29日，在公盟被取缔后，许志永所谓因“逃税”被警方带走，现在关押在北京第一看守所。联合早报说，除了公盟外，北京“益仁平”中心、爱知行研究所、无国界爱心、德先生研究所、打工之友等非政府组织也将受到打压，有海外资金支持的组织将首当其冲。

连许志永这样温和的人都要关押，这个政府显然是卑鄙的没有前途的。牢狱之灾丝毫无损许先生的人格，反而更加让人敬重他。当局失算了。

“我希望我们是个自由幸福的国家。每个人不需要违背良心，只要靠自己的才能和品德就可以找到合适的位置；一个简单而幸福的社会，人性的善得到最大的张扬，恶得到最大的抑制；诚实、信用、友爱、互助将成为我们生活的常态，没有那么多烦恼和愤怒，每一个人脸上是纯真的笑容。”
http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_47404fc70100efcv.html

原文: https://doubleaf.com/2009/08/05/944

京維權律師組織遭查抄

京 維 權 律 師 組 織 遭 查 抄

(星島日報報道)長期提供民間法律援助的北京非政府組織公盟，昨天被當地民政局取締及查抄。事發前，公盟剛剛接到巨額稅務處罰通知，公盟發言人表示正在面臨「滅頂之災」。

公盟由一批活躍的北京維權學者和律師共同組建，代理孫志剛收容致死案、毒奶粉受害家長案、胡佳案、鄧玉嬌案、四川豆腐渣工程案等敏感案件，在民間享有極高知名度。

據悉，公盟於本月十四日接到稅務部門的行政處罰通知，擬追繳及處罰漏稅合共一百四十二萬多元人民幣，其中包括針對境外機構資助的合作項目。昨天，北京民政局再以「非法活動」為由，發文取締公盟的下屬法律研究中心，並同時採取了查抄行動，於公盟辦公地點查抄了包括數台電腦在內的物

品。

公盟的法定代表、維權律師許志永透過網絡表示，公盟是非盈利的公益組織，生存全靠社會各界捐助，沒有任何盈餘卻被處罰所得稅，令公盟本來就很窘逼的財務捉襟見肘。

公盟另一主要成員張立輝接受本報採訪時表示，公盟本應到民政局註冊為社團組織，可是一直不被允許，只能以工商部門登記註冊為納稅企業。他強調，稅務處罰不合理而且過重，又加上民政局的取締查抄，名義上雖只是針對公盟的下屬法律研究中心，但公盟的整體存在已經堪虞。

2009-07-18

京 維 權 律 師 組 織 遭 查 抄

(星島日報報道)長期提供民間法律援助的北京非政府組織公盟，昨天被當地民政局取締及查抄。事發前，公盟剛剛接到巨額稅務處罰通知，公盟發言人表示正在面臨「滅頂之災」。

公盟由一批活躍的北京維權學者和律師共同組建，代理孫志剛收容致死案、毒奶粉受害家長案、胡佳案、鄧玉嬌案、四川豆腐渣工程案等敏感案件，在民間享有極高知名度。

據悉，公盟於本月十四日接到稅務部門的行政處罰通知，擬追繳及處罰漏稅合共一百四十二萬多元人民幣，其中包括針對境外機構資助的合作項目。昨天，北京民政局再以「非法活動」為由，發文取締公盟的下屬法律研究中心，並同時採取了查抄行動，於公盟辦公地點查抄了包括數台電腦在內的物品。

公盟的法定代表、維權律師許志永透過網絡表示，公盟是非盈利的公益組織，生存全靠社會各界捐助，沒有任何盈餘卻被處罰所得稅，令公盟本來就很窘逼的財務捉襟見肘。

公盟另一主要成員張立輝接受本報採訪時表示，公盟本應到民政局註冊為社團組織，可是一直不被允許，只能以工商部門登記註冊為納稅企業。他強調，稅務處罰不合理而且過重，又加上民政局的取締查抄，名義上雖只是針對公盟的下屬法律研究中心，但公盟的整體存在已經堪虞。

2009-07-18