Recently, a British drug smuggler’s death sentence was upheld by the Supreme People’s Court in China. News on Xinhuanet.com:
Death penalty on British drug dealer in line with Chinese law: spokesman
BEIJING, Oct. 13 (Xinhua) — Chinese court’s sentence of death penalty on a British drug trafficker is in line with Chinese laws, said a spokesman for China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs on Tuesday.
Akmal Shaikh, 53, male, was sentenced to death in the first instance trial by the Intermediate People’s Court of Urumqi Municipality in northwest China’s Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region on Oct. 29, 2008, said Ma Zhaoxu, spokesman for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs at a regular news briefing.
The case is currently being reviewed by China’s Supreme People’s Court, Ma said.
“All the procedures have been in line with relevant Chinese laws. During the trial, The accused and the counsel had freely exercised their rights of defense, and translation service had been provided to the accused. His legal rights had been fully guaranteed,” he said.
According to Ma, the British embassy in China and a British organization had proposed to organize mental disease examinations on Akmal Shaikh, while offering no evidence that he may be suffering from mental disease.
The accused had said that he and his family members had no history of mental diseases, Ma said.
The case is under examination, he said.
So what do Chinese people think of the sentence online? A survey from Huanqiu.com shows that among the netizens who took the survey:
- 98.8% (3528 votes) support the Supreme People’s Court’s sentence;
- 96.7% (3737 votes) think the British media is interfering in China’s internal affairs.
In another survey that asks “What do you think of British media’s report on this incident”:
- 53.9% (1924 votes) think these reports show Britain still has an outdated colonial mindset;
- 30.1% (1074 votes) think the British media is using “human rights” as an excuse;
- 16.0% (569 votes) think they are sensationalizing this incident with malicious intentions.
English coverage can be found on Google News.
Following are some translated Chinese comments from various source:
From Huanqiu.com:
Of course I support. No matter if he’s Chinese or a foreigner, on Chinese land, he should obey Chinese laws.
Mercy to drug smugglers is a crime against the people.
People’s rights are based on the fact that everyone should be equal in front of laws. If we released this British criminal, what should we do to Chinese drug dealers? Should we abandon the death penalty? These scrum [drug dealers] would even risk their lives to smuggle drugs. If there’s no death penalty, what will they be afraid of?
So if Hitler had “delusional psychosis and bipolar disorder”, why do British people dig him from his grave every year [sarcasm]? That’s so “lack of human rights”.
The Chinese government should not pay much attention to British pressure. Drug smugglers deserve death penalty.
PRC government is not the same government in Qing Dynasty. We have judicial supremacy.
British dude, do you know? In ancient China the law is much more cruel. If you cheat in an exam, you die.
From Netease.com:
From Chengdu, Sichuan:
Britain should thank us for saving them from yet another drug dealer.
From Guangzhou, Guangdong:
The one who has “delusional psychosis and bipolar disorder” is the British media.
From Nanjing, Jiangsu:
International drug smugglers come commit crimes against the Chinese people. One comes, we kill one. Two come, we shoot a pair. Bullets for these scum are plenty. I support the Supreme People’s Court’s sentence. He should pay a price for violating Chinese laws.
From Changsha:
What he’s sentenced with is not the death sentence but loneliness.
From Qinzhou:
Akmal must die. We are collecting signatures to support his death penalty.
From Macfans.com.cn:
Ghmily from Guangzhou:
Wow! Four kilograms! And he put 4k heroin in his hand band just like that and tried to enter China? Is that too ignorant/arrogant?
Bfee:
I’m fed up with those people who use “mental disorder” as an excuse [to evade punishment from laws]. If you are mentally sick you don’t have to pay a price for your crime? Everyone on the planet has some level of “disorder” in mind so we are all free from responsibilities …
Spirit of Six Strings:
[He] should be executed in public. “Pong” and China’s drug smuggling will drop by 30% immediately. Or we inject all 4kg heroin into his vein at once. If he can still survive then we let him go.
Jambillking:
4 kg! He deserves several deaths. [Smuggling 50 gram heroin is the threshold for a death penalty in China.]
Related Posts:
- A Chinese netizen reacts to China's execution of a British citizen convicted of drug smuggling by citing government official Lin Zexu banning opium 170 yrs ago. » 238 comments
- Mainland Chinese netizen reactions to the recent news of the United States selling weapons to Taiwan. Some say it is politics. Others say it is just business. » 407 comments
- Chinese netizen reactions to the March 2009 confrontation between American ship, USNS Impeccable, and 5 small Chinese vessels in the South China Seas. » 239 comments
- Translated Chinese netizen reactions to news of Michael Jackson's death from a heart attack. The King of Pop had fans around the world, including many in China. » 85 comments
- A Tangshan, China bus driver was beaten to death after traffic accident with two men in a Toyota Prado SUV. Tangshan bus drivers on strike demanding justice. » 18 comments
British Akmal Shaikh Executed, Chinese Netizen Reactions 
America Sells Arms to Taiwan, Chinese Netizen Reactions 
South China Sea Confrontation, Chinese Netizen Reactions 
Michael Jackson Is Dead, Chinese Netizen Reactions 
Tangshan Bus Driver Beaten to Death After Dispute 
Seems most of the comments are in line with my opinion also – the dude broke the law here, suck it up cupcake, you obey the laws of the land you’re in. Using mental illness in a drug trafficking case is hilarious…talk about reaching. Especially when it comes to drug trafficking, these kind of people are diseases on society and deserve the social justice delt down to them – that much H would definitely destroy more than a few lives/families.
4kg of H is a fuckin load. That’s a couple hundred G USD depending on where yer at. If he doesn’t get the death penalty in China he’ll probably have a fuckin horrible life (or possibly very short) should he be let loose in prison/public from whoever he owes.
Marx –
You said: “There is empirical evidence that the death penalty does *not* prevent future crimes.”
NOT TRUE!
This man will never commit ANY future crimes.
In specific, the death penalty works perfectly.
What sort of wicked social justice are you people subscribing to?
O_o …
“Wicked” social justice? “Wicked”? Really?
He broke the law for which he already knew the penalty – (or should have at least checked what the penalty was) – and he CHOSE TO DO IT ANYWAY.
He received the punishment that he knew he could get.
It was HIS choice.
I think he chose poorly.
Who was “wicked”?
Not to mention that if you look at countries where the death penalty is in place for crimes like, say, trafficking, and strictly enforced – lets say Singapore, there is much less drug trafficking than in countries with loosely enforced laws.
That being said, as long as there is significant due diligence for capital punishment, bring it on – fuck around and get what’s coming to you. If this dude wants to run a bunch of H across international borders he deserves the punishment handed down – fuck ‘em – Marx, you’re goin to go to bat for scum like that? Good on ya.
The rates of drug use and drug smuggling has nothing to do with the punishment associated with it. Again, there is empirical evidence that shows the death penalty does nothing in terms of preventing others from committing similar crimes.
Do your research: States that have the death penalty in the US have higher rates of murder and violent crime. The US overall has higher rates of murder and violent crime than Canada and most countries of Europe that do not have a death penalty.
Killing this person is not going to stop drug smuggling. We need to get at the social inequalities that make people buy/sell drugs in the first place. Only then will it have a positive effect on society as a whole.
“Again, there is empirical evidence”
Really? Proof that crime increases when the country/state/province has an enforced death penalty?
I am interested in reading such “proof”. Are they comparing comparable population sizes and economic bases?
Please provide links.
$50 million for putting someone to death?!?!? Now I understand why Developed Nations are in debt.
AS for you link, you can’t use figures on US to justify these scenarios, the world doesn’t evolve around one country. As for the appeal thing, this is even more reason to just take him to the end of his Green Mile. Evidence is overwhelming that he’s messing up society with his drug activities.
No Marx, you’re full of it.
The low crime rate is not a result of no death penelty. I could definitely say that without death penelty, crime will be more serious in China.
Just tell me what you will gain if this person dies as opposed to sitting in jail for the rest of his life. What the fuck difference does it make?
The cost socially – to be seen to “go soft” on foreigners who commit a crime?
That cost is loss of respect for the government – a cost the leaders of 1.5 billion people (who are vastly out-numbered by their populace, and are keenly aware that they need to be seen to do the right thing to keep control) are completely unwilling to pay.
The cost monetarily – thousands of dollars per year to keep a man alive who chose to break the law.
He knew it could mean his death – and he did it anyway.
Note: I’m still waiting for your “empirical evidence”.
1) This isn’t about the Chinese government saving face. The argument is about the death penalty and whether it’s right or not for someone to be put to death for a non-violent crime. Don’t conflate the two.
2) I would encourage you to check out Amnesty International, but here’s the gist. But by all means, continue your bullshitting… (http://www.amnesty.org/en/for-media/press-releases/end-death-penalty-drug-related-offences-20090622):
Despite the executions in Asia there is no clear evidence of a decline in drug-trafficking that could be attributed to the threat or use of the death penalty. There is no credible evidence that the death penalty deters serious crime in general more effectively than other punishments. The most recent survey of research findings on the relation between the death penalty and homicide rates, conducted for the United Nations (UN) in 1988 and updated in 1996 and 2002, concluded: “…research has failed to provide scientific proof that executions have a greater deterrent effect than life imprisonment. Such proof is unlikely to be forthcoming. The evidence as a whole gives no positive support to the deterrent hypothesis.”
UN human rights mechanisms – including the UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary, or arbitrary executions, and the UN Human Rights Committee — have concluded that the death penalty for drug offences fails to meet the condition of “most serious crime”, under which the death penalty is allowed only as an “exceptional measure” where “there was an intention to kill which resulted in the loss of life” (UN Doc, A/HRC/4/20, 29 January 2007, para 53). The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and the director of the UN Office on Drugs and Crime have likewise expressed grave concerns about the application of the death penalty for drug offences.
1 This IS about the government of China enforcing the law equally – NOT giving special treatment to people who break the law simply because they are citizens of another country – and have different beliefs.
YOU believe it is wrong to kill him for a nonviolent crime.
You are trying to push your “morality” on the citizens and judiciary of another country.
If you want to show that the death penalty is NOT working, you will have to show that there is an INCREASE in crime when it is on the books and regularly enforced.
“No clear evidence of a decline” is not good enough.
But, to give you your own words back, “But by all means, continue your bullshitting.”
This is getting ridiculous. You’re not even following your original logic anymore. Regardless, the burden of proof is upon you to prove that there is a DECREASE in crime when it is on the books.
You are right though that I am projecting my own morality on China. I am saying it is immoral to kill another human being for *any* crime. It serves no purpose (and you still have yet to prove this).
I am siding with Jay. I’m afraid Marx’s logic makes no sense to me. People shouldn’t be killed no matter what the crime? I would rather have a serial killer executed than locked up for life and then have to think oh wait part of the tax I pay (MY MONEY) goes towards keeping him alive in that cell for god knows how long.
He’s no good in society and he’s causing a burden on tax payers money MY MONEY while in jail. As harsh as it sounds, it’s only logically to kill these evil people. It will ease some tension on these financial problems with some governments, US is in debt in the TRILLIONS for Christ’s sake and I really hope Obama can fix. But killing these sort of people will only be a better contribution economically and to society as well.
“You’re not even following your original logic anymore.”
Ha! Perhaps you should re-read my posts and then re-read yours – YOU are the one who is jumping around, I’m just trying to pin you down and get a clear, logical statement of your position – which you have finally given.
“I am projecting my own morality on China. I am saying it is immoral to kill another human being for *any* crime.”
I disagree with the idea that you have the right to dictate morality to an entire nation. Would you like it if people forced their morality on you?
I believe the death penalty for murder is right – If you take another’s life, you should lose your own – it is simply justice.
Death for drugs… Well, it’s up to each nation to set their own laws, and even if 4.5 billion people agreed with you, and lobbied hard for China to change their laws – China still wouldn’t.
“the burden of proof is upon you to prove that there is a DECREASE in crime when it is on the books.”
It clearly works – China has the lowest crime rates per capita. Compare any city of 15 million people with Beijing, and Beijing will have the lower crime rate – and they’ve had and enforced the death penalty for various crimes for the last 1000+ years.
THAT is better proof than you can find to back your idea that it doesn’t work. “No clear evidence of a decline.” is just a weasel phrase for: “We don’t like it, but we can’t prove it’s bad – even though we tried.”
I’m glad you have strong convictions on the death penalty – just don’t expect me to agree with them.
Developing China – It costs more to execute a person than to keep him in prison for the rest of his life. It might be different in China, but any developed nation (ESPECIALLY the US) this is the case.
He “wastes more of your tax money” clogged in the appeal system waiting for execution than if you were to keep him rotting in jail for the rest of his life. Your reasoning is just false. I refer you to: http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/murder-rate-declines-every-region-except-south-where-executions-are-most-prevalent. It states:
–
Florida, for example, spent between $25 million to $50 million more per year on capital cases than it would have to if all murderers received life without parole. The Indiana Legislative Services Agency estimated that had the state sentenced its death row populations to life without parole, Indiana taxpayers would have been spared approximately $37.1 million.
–
So… No. You’re just wrong.
Sorry, wrong link. It should be: http://www.law.columbia.edu/law_school/communications/reports/summer06/capitalpunish
This is a comment on Marx’s last link in this string.
This is not an argument for or against capital punishment. I seek only to clarify why killing someone in the US costs more than lifelong incarceration because it seems very counter-intuitive.
Capital Punishment in the US:
$2.5-5 million USD exists because of legislative “red tape.” It’s just bullshit court costs. The defendant is fighting for his life. He will use all his available resources to delay his sentence and which in turn consumes public funds. Court cases in these situations can last years using hundreds of hours of manpower.
Here’s the cost in China:
Cost: 0.25 USD for a 9mm bullet
yes, the injustice is irreversible.
Now that is a biased poll –
ARE YOU:
A: Arrogant
B: A Prick
C: A vindictive little shit
I lol’d
I think those were three separate yes/no questions, but it would be funny if you were right and they weren’t.
53.9 + 30.1 + 16.0 = 100%
wow, those poll results are surprising.
a more or less unanimous feeling by a brainwashed mass, of being interfered with and wanting an outsider to die.
i am shocked, SHOCKED!
……not
[moderated: personal insult]
we are just all united as chinese people, stop using your western “brainwashing” words here.
He won’t eat it, he hates everything. He likes it! Hey Mikey!
“Brainwashing” is not a Western word. It’s actually Chinese in origin, I think. Either way, it was widely used in Mao’s time.
Taking online poll results as an indicator of what any given population thinks (much less a population of over 1 BILLION PEOPLE) is a huge mistake.
“we are just all united as chinese people, stop using your western “brainwashing” words here.”
Doesn’t that word come from the Chinese xinao? Anyway, being united in calling for someone’s death doesn’t seem a good thing for me. Does no-one in China believe that killing people is always wrong? There are a few Buddhists around at least…
yeah but now the Chinese government wants to torture, convert, and/or kill any Buddhist monks they find.
no, only dalai lama, the criminal and his group of killers
I’m a buddhist and support the Supreme Court of China to kill this bastard!
the 4 kg heroin should be distributed in the UK, hope the supreme court give it back to their family, let them all take it
That doesn’t sound very Buddhist at all.
Because his name is Akmal Shaikh, he shouldn’t be entitled to a european passport or citizenship? Why? Because he shouldn’t be allowed to sully the fabric of white european nations? or because he might be a terrorist? By that logic, you should be denied any sort of visa in an any asian nation cause some people with a name like yours have been known to smuggle drugs into almost every asian country. fuck outta here you grafted recessive frosted mini wheat. as for Akmal, fuck him too. Any smuggler knows what he or she is in for if you try to bring in H into any asian country.
I remember there was some back and forth reply here, now it’s gone, thanks moderator, for turning chinaSMACK into a mini-me harmonious society.
My advice, subscribe to the comments so you get them in your mailbox the moment they’re submitted.
To be fair though, Python already warned everyone he’s going to moderate the comments on his posts. The comments on other posts by other bloggers seem to remain largely unmoderated.
As it is, there have been a few people approving of Python’s moderation while those that have complained are established trolls. You’re the first “non-troll” to complain…and I do largely empathize with your anti-harmonious society angle. No offense to Python since I think he’s trying to do what he believes to be a good thing, but I personally draw the line at spamming and personal harassment.
Credit to Python for at least making an effort, however I am largely opposed to moderating for a couple of reasons:
I have seen time and again thoughtful responses to initially trolling/ignorant comments. The way I understand the moderation rules, any follow ups are deleted along with the offending comment.
The large number of comments following every story here almost guarantees that one man’s crusade against trolls of the internet are going to be hit and miss. Rather than random and obtrusive “[moderated: reason]” stamps littered all over the reply area, mods can probably change the vote ratings (more than ± 1 limit) so offensive comment are hidden while allowing the rest of us to reply or re-rate if we disagree.
Moreover I find trolls sometimes are entertaining, and partitions intelligent comments so the reply area do not become too…academic.
Finally there is the previously mentioned harmonious censorship, there is no place for it on the internet, least of all a site that often zooms in on China’s absurd censorship efforts.
My sarcasm and little rant aside, Python’s moderating is far from intolerable, so I shut up and take your advice.
whichone,
Heh, at the same time, its arguable that trolls often discourage more reasonable and rational people from commenting. People tend to comment when they can identify with at least part of the existing commenters. Too much of one group and you begin alienating another. Some may prefer this, but it usually depends on which group you’re in. I’m all for striking and maintaining a tenuous balance between the serious and not-so-serious folk.
I kinda disagree with this. It’s one thing for a government to censor the public sphere and another thing for a private website to censor on its own property. It is not mutually exclsuve for a private website to “zoom in on China’s absurd censorship efforts” yet have limits on the discourse in its comments section. There is no right of free speech on private property.
I agree with you on good comments coming from bad. I have some faith with people moderating themselves, which is why I’ve been supportive of the comment voting thing since it was first implemented. We see how it works with PUSAN PLAYA, but all the same, it hasn’t worked with a lot of other people. Of course, that’s just my subjective opinion on the quality of those other people’s comments. Either way, the subject matter of this website lends itself to attracting certain types of people and certain types of comments. I personally think a lot of people can learn a lot about China through it, but that’s premised upon the website not being overrun by idiocy so much that those who could benefit instead shun this place, even though the idiocy itself could also allow a lot of people to learn a lot about their own society, or society in general.
Bleh, cheers.
Thanks for your suggestions. I want to make it clear here: my rules are not chinaSMACK’s and I only moderate posts that I contribute (four out of 400+ right now). 99% posts in this website remain “unmoderated”. However, I believe every translator, even she/he doesn’t do anything to comments in this blog, has rules in selecting which comments she/he would like to translate. For me translating certain comments is a waste of my time and I apply (almost) the same rules equally to comments under my posts (though many comments here are much more thought-provoking than most I translated). Fauna and I had a discussion on this and I asked for different rules on only my posts. She’s very tolerant and had no objection so far. So I believe I can carry on until Fauna changes her mind and takes the privilege from me.
As I said, you only need to follow the rules under my posts and I thank you very much for your understanding. What I contributed is only a tiny fraction and the vast majority in chinaSMACK is still unmoderated and much more entertaining/much less “academic” than mine. I believe this is why chinaSMACK is great: it tolerates both commenters and translators. And that’s exactly the reason why I changed myself from a commenter to a contributor. I enjoy the switching. If you have time and proficiency in both languages you can enjoy it too.
There will probably no final convergence for different opinions on this issue. I’m not going to spend too much time on finding the best “degree” of moderation. My rules are simple and I’d like to save my time for translating more posts. Welcome to pythonSMACK. LOL
The fact of the matter is his case was decided by upper level CCP hacks long before it ever reached the ’supreme court’.
That means there is no law here.
Or ot put it another way, the ‘law’ of the land is make relationship, give gifts, pay money, provide whores; whatever it takes to make the CCP hack you’re dealing with move favourably on your issue.
Pretend otherwise at your peril.
Right, a drug dealer getting the death penalty, someone must of interfered! It’s a conspiracy!
have, must have…
Or ot put it another way, the ‘law’ of the land is make relationship, give gifts, pay money, provide whores; whatever it takes to make the CCP hack you’re dealing with move favourably on your issue.
Exactly, rule of law, people, Rule of Law, sadly lacking.
The “rule of law” is pretty fucking clear in cases like this. Drug trafficking over X = death penalty. You’re the type of dildo who cries foul whenever _anything_ happens. If he was let go you’d say “he was let go due to brit chamber interfering!” if he gets the death penalty it’s “CCP deciding his fate outside of courts”…*yawn*
Does anyone else feel that when one reads these posts and surveys that you can guess pretty accurately what the Chinese will say?
Of course it would be very different if it were a Chinese person in England.
P.S. go ahead and shoot him, drugs are drugs and that guy is bang to rights.
i want him to get the firing squad. make sure they hit his arms & legs first. then while his lying there screamin like a girl..walk up and gangland his face while his family watches. serves them right. poisoning lives with his dirty drugs. he deserves every bullet shot into him. flithy fuck3r! British have their laws & China has theirs. i’m a very angry person if no one has noticed ^_~
Yeah, what does this have to do with colonialism? I don’t get it.
And do 96.7% of Chinese netizens really have a good enough English reading level to follow the British media on this in order to conclude that “the British media is interfering in China’s internal affairs”?
Judged by the same standard, Xinhua has been grossly interfering in the internal affairs of every other country in the world.
Can you appreciate the difference between:
these are the shits in other countries
and
these are the shits in other countries we must stop, because we do not agree with local laws
Have no idea what you are talking about. Could you try again in English once you sober up?
I was referring to your comment on British news’ “interfering in China’s internal affair”.
“Judged by the same standard, Xinhua has been grossly interfering in the internal affairs of every other country in the world.”
The difference between reporting, and reporting news while urging politicians to do something about the laws in another country, is not the same ’standard’.
You know what? never mind. I can’t believe I defended mouthpiece news agency.
you don’t agree with local laws, how about the “locals” don’t like your laws? will you change your laws for them? or, to put it another way, do you give a damn what they say?
That’s clearly not the case anymore.
Yeah now if you cheat on an exam the punishment is you must be a government official… possibly even a criminal court judge.
Well, if the guy was white China would not carry out the execusion. In a way i think its right. Most people commiting crime in Europe are non-white. I remember 10 years ago a Australian setting a Hotel on fire by accident. He got death but was released. I also think this is right. He had no intension what so ever setting the hotel on fire. When setting the sentense, use common sence or Hitlers scale.
Eh..uh..your comparisons are definitely off base here. As a result, I don’t get your point.
1) The guy above, regardless of race, was trafficking a large amount of heroine internationally.
2) The “Australian” guy *accidently* (by your mention)set a fire.
An accident and intentionally commiting a serious crime are two very different things. One shows a disregard for society and human life, one is just some dude fucking up. Heinous acts resulting in the detriment of others = death penalty can be justified (whether you agree or disagree), but death penalty for an accident would be ridiculous.
Death penalty is harsh! He’s lucky that China aren’t tearing apart their global relations for a born yesterday joker. But he did commit a crime, and should just sit in a prison for life. It’s these jokers who are spreading the drug evil around and wasting everyone’s time cleaning up their stupidity!
Yeah, I’m taking it back on the exams. Im gonna start slowly slicing anyone to death who cheats on an exam and hasnt passed the college entrance exams. Of course the new exams will all be based on my mindless ramblings about a philosopher who just happens to coincide with my brutal application of force.
That aside? Can anyone seriously stand there and be like oh yeah drugs are the worst thing in a society and complete neccesitate the ending of a man’s life based on his ill advised cowboy capitalism?
Not all drugs are created equal.
There are somewhat clear understandings between soft/recreational drugs and, say, hardcore life-destroying drugs. H definitely falls into the latter category.
That being said, it doesn’t matter what you or I think, the fact is _this is the law here_. If he wants to do cowboy capitalism, he accepts the risk. There is no secret that China offers the death penalty for many heinous crimes, including trafficking a certain amount of drugs.
This isn’t a moral or ethical question, this is a legal question. Did he break the law in China? Yes. Does the law offer death penalty for his crime? Yes. If you agree or disagree with it – well – it makes absolutely no difference, because he took the risk, he accepted the punishment. Welcome to capitalism.
Only people who have used try to make such subtle distinctions. Oh the drugs I do are soft, also illegal, but they’re not hardcore like H, a little pot is not the same as a little heroine, a little X won’t fu up for life… sounds pretty hypocritical and stupid… are you stoned?
I’ll say it again, Mike, not all drugs are created equal. There is no “subtle distinction” between caffeine – pot – heroine – psychotropics…you’re a fuckin idiot.
I *have* used, I’ve tried most drugs I’ve had the opportunity to try – given, in relatively controlled environments and not from untrusted sources. I don’t have much interest any more, but am OK with people doing whatever they want to do within reasonable limits.
You’re the hypocrite, Mike, you’re a socially brainwashed tool – caffeine *is a drug* no? How do you even define drug..is sugar a drug? tobacco? There are definitely differences and you’re not worth a continued argument.
Wow… I thought you were just a hypocrite but now know you are also a wannabe-psychic blowhard. You could infer all that made-up nonsense from my comment? I thought we were talking about illegal drugs? Oh, and your rant is the typical defensive rant from a drug using hypocrite. Don’t change this argument to defining “drug”, this is about you being a hypocritical dick. I neither condemned drug use nor drug users; just hypocrites. Your comment was hypocritical because you suggested he deserved it for a hard drug like H but left it hanging there that if it was pot or X you might think it was unfair even though at the same time you admitted it was about what’s legal or illegal in China. YOU said his crime was “heinous” even though I’m pretty sure(certain) that’s not the definition in the Chinese law books.
Mike
Of course for different types of drugs the punishment will be different. What is so hypocritical about that? There is a reason that drugs are divided into different categories, such as schedule I – V controlled substances in the United States, based on their potential for abuse, addictiveness, danger etc. Different sentencing guidelines exist for the amount, type, and circumstances drug possessions, how is this difficult to understand??
To give your another example: a person driving two miles per hour over the speed limit and one going fifty miles per hour over are both technically breaking the traffic laws, should they suffer the same punishment? Is it hypocritical for the police of issue a warning for the former and ticket/arrest the latter??
whichone,
I’m not arguing about the distinctions or legal definitions in the US or some other country. We are talking about China. I would love drug laws around the world to all be based on sound science and common sense health rather than fear, paranoia, and the interests of big business. Read the whole conversation and not just a few words. To suggest, like Dick in China did, that he deserved the death penalty for one but not the other, without defining what the other is(what? coke? meth? x?) and without giving any sound reason other than his personal experience sounds arbitrary and foolish. The death penalty for some retarded trafficker just sounds ridiculous.
Mike
Actually drug policies around the world are mostly based on science and common sense. I bring up U.S. law as an example, but China is also a party to the U.N. Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs treaty. Each country dole out their own enforcement and punishments but the classification are certainly not arbitrary. According to the treaty, heroin is a schedule IV substance- those that possess “particularly dangerous properties”. Chinese law in this case states possession of 50 grams or more are subject to capital punishment. If it was pot/x/meth/whatever else, then they may or may not have corresponding weight limits for capital punishment so he would not/should not get the death penalty. I believe this is also the point Rick was trying to make.
Whichone,
So, right there, and like that, you can support the idea that heroine deserves the death penalty and some other drug doesn’t because of some U.N. classification? Seriously? And what about the amount? 51 grams deserves the death penalty but 49 grams doesn’t? That’s just absurd. Just because the U.N. has some classification system neither makes it correct nor right. Again, the death penalty for some retarded trafficker doesn’t seem right.
Mike
The scheduling of drugs in the U.N. treaty aren’t born out of a vacuum, I think a lot of experts decided with various criteria to separate different kinds of illegal drugs. I don’t really have any problems with people who sell dangerous drugs with readily foreseeable, disastrous consequences getting death penalty while someone who sells say, pot getting a lesser sentence.
I don’t know what the precise rationale is behind 50 gram of heroin except I think there should be a line somewhere. As in the traffic example, when someone is arbitrarily close to 50 grams I’m sure judges have some leeway on which way to lean. My guess is that each time some shoots heroin it takes a few grams, 50 grams is the mark (by fiat) between personal stash and wholesale size.
Your argument seems to say since there is no clear, non-arbitrary limit above which people should get the capital punishment, then there should be no limit, and therefore, no capital punishment at all. I think this is an absurd insistence at super rationality which does not work in practical situations.
I believe there are clearly weight classes for mass distribution and equally clear cases when it’s for personal consumption however in the murky middle a line has to be drawn. Even if the precise amount – 50 grams – is arbitrary its range is logically decided. Once a limit is established, law enforcements efforts then have to abide by those standards consistently.
whichone,
Rather than shoot him in the head, they should just let him have a conversation with you.
I don’t know how you can’t see your arguments as ridiculous, Fish, it’s amusing to watch someone waffle on without any logical foundation though, keep going.
Rick in China,
There might be no apparant logic to my comments, but I’ve definately not waffled. I’ll say it again, you are a hypocrite.
My original problem was with how nonchalantly and seemingly arbitrarily you condemned him, almost cheering on the executioner along the sidelines. As someone who has obviously supported the illegal drug industry, no matter how far in the past that may have been, you come across as completely hypocritical. You may or may not not have used H but you’ve used other illegal substances, right? Substances that could get their trafficker/supplier put in jail for a very long time. Supply and demand says that if there weren’t people willing to buy it and use it, there probably wouldn’t be that many people making it, trafficking it, and selling it. It’s like loving your gas-guzzeling car while at the same time condemning the oil company.
The govt makes drugs illegal because they can make money off them and control the population.
Mike makes a good point. If you ever use any illegal drugs, you are supporting the people who have enough balls to grow/sell/make/smuggle it in our disgusting civil society. Defending the murder of one them is pretty sick stuff, especially coming from someone who admittedly uses them and the risks they take to get high in your precious little “controlled environment”.
And, btw, not everyone subscribes to your version of “reasonable limits” or what is dangerous. You are a hypocrite sir.
When a law is bullshit, then it no longer becomes a question of legality. If Hitler makes a law saying all the jews should wear a star of david then it doesnt really matter if he got the popular vote.
China can do what it wants, but its the right of every person on Earth to point out that it’s wrong. As so many people seem to have.
H is one fucked up drug which I hardly can say I agree with recreational or even in many cases medical use. That doesnt make it alright to use state authority to execute someone for fulfilling the demands of a population. If people wanna put garbage up their arms its pretty damn hard to stop em. You can still buy heroin in Singapore and they’ve had that death penality for a while now.
Exactly, the state creates this fucked up loophole, then executes people for exploiting it. Govt is sick and disturbed.
no matter what,he is a dead meat,that’s for heroin smuggler,the Chinese will kill him,and God will kick his ass too..
The issue here is has the British government made an appeal to the Chinese government?
If not, UK doesn’t really care about their non Anglo-Saxon citizens OR they are finally coming to grips with respecting another state’s capital punishment laws.
Australia kicked up a stint a few years ago when its own citizen got done by Singapore for transiting drugs through its borders.
Has anyone ever heard of the Opium Wars or the concept of extraterritoriality in the Asian context? If you haven’t, go read some history.
Yes, of course, this has to do with colonialism. And yes, of course, British colonialism is still a relevant issue to the Chinese today. Britain did not hand over Hong Kong to China until only 12 years ago. Other legacies of imperial Britain, such as the McMahon Line, is still troubling China in the 21 century. And even today, the British is still enjoying the proceeds from various forms of colonial theft from China, one highly visiable example of which being the large collection of looted Chinese art housed in the British Museum.
The idea that Britain has cleansed herself of the colonial/imperial mentality is ludicrous. So is the belief that her days of apologizing to the rest of the world are over. The fact is that the UK today is still benefitting greatly from its past practices of aggression and colonialism. And I would even push this point further, and argue that she keeps committing the same sort of atrocities even in the 21st century. For example, Britain is still waging her THIRD war in Afghanistan, together with the USA, as if the Great Game has never ended. And It was only so recently that Britain pulled out of Iraq, where, under Anglo-American occupation, mass murder, theft of oil and looting of Mesopotamian art took place. The way in which Iraqi museums were sacked, and art works smuggled to the west is only too reminiscent of the old days of the Elgin Marbles, the Rosetta Stone and the Benin Bronzes, all of which, by the way, are still on proud display in the British Museum in London.
The Chinese people have excellent long-term memory. They’ve kept a detailed record of themselves for thousands of years. The Chinese may forgive Britain one day when she’s truely mended her erroneous ways. But people should never forget, for history so frequently repeats herself. The deep-seated fear in the Chinese mind of British colonialism is not some crazy paranoia. It is justifies by prudence, rationality, and a deep sense of history.
[moderated: troll]
Well, Hitler brought modern highways to the world. So should we stop condemning nazism? Or is fascism the salvation of western civilization? Don’t be ridiculous
Given some of the racist things you’ve said in comments elsewhere on this site, it’s hard to take you seriously, DUKE FLEED.
That said, the irony here is you being guilty of the same selective memory you’re accusing the Chinese of. Let’s not waste our time arguing over who has selective memory. Everyone does. Reminding each other of what they’re conveniently forgetting doesn’t diminish the point they’re making, unless their point is that what they’re conveniently forgetting doesn’t exist…which clearly isn’t Roadblock’s point. Someone referenced the “colonial” mindset mentioned in the translated Chinese comments of this post and asked what relevance it had. Roadblock answered that question and explained the relevance, quite eloquently if I may add.
I strongly disagree with your belief that Western colonization was Japan or China or anyone’s “salvation”. If you want to believe in concepts of might makes right and ignore the ethical and moral considerations of conquest and subjugation, fine. In fact, I’d love to hear you supporting the Chinese on issues of Tibet and Xinjiang. However, I do think it is historically accurate and reasonably intelligent to say that both societies were doing just fine on their own. It wasn’t as if their societies were dying before Westerners intervened and saved them.
Actually Japan was devolving into some sort of perpetual civil war. Most Japanese scholars and historians agree that the Western inpsired Meiji Restoration(Reformation) saved Japan from chaos and collapse. If they hadn’t followed the Western model and tried to become a colonizer, they would have become a colony themselves and would be something like the Phillipines rather than the major player they are.
Mike Fish,
I strongly disagree with your characterization of Japan “devolving into some sort of perpetual civil war” and that the Meiji Restoration “saved Japan from chaos and collapse.” That’s simply not true and I’m not even going to ask you to produce those “Japanese scholars and historians” who agree with such a sentiment.
The Meiji Restoration was not “Western inspired”. It was a shift in Japanese society that involved adapting to Western influences. Yes, it brought significant changes and new directions to Japan, but it is a jump in logic to argue that left to their own devices, Japanese society would’ve led itself to its utter ruin. It would have, as with most societies, merely taken another path with different outcomes we cannot possibly predict so certainly as “chaos and collapse”.
The Meiji Restoration accelerated the industrialization of Japan, preparing it to meet with the rising colonialism of the West. Absent the industrialization, yes, it might have become a colony, yes, they might have not become colonialist aggressors themselves, and yes, they might have not become the major player they are today…but does that means “chaos and collapse” and “perpetual civil war”?
No, it doesn’t. Western influences certainly hasn’t saved the many nations today that still regularly face civil war, chaos, and collapse. Put another way, Western influence itself doesn’t “save”.
Furthermore, what Japan experienced prior to the Meiji Restoration is not altogether different from the history of other nations, with power waxing and waning between different factions, society changing and shaped by the strength of internal and external influences. Surely, European powers experienced similar changes in their history, right? Past performance does not guarantee future results.
We have no idea what would’ve happened absent Western influence, but it is an audacious — even arrogant — presumption to say that Western influence saved the Japanese (or anyone) from themselves. I ask, what is it about the Japanese themselves that would’ve doomed them?
As industrialized Western colonialism made it clear to the Japanese that the world was getting smaller and they could not realistically hope to remain in splendid isolation with the existing structure of their society, they (or those that would come to lead the Japanese) came to the conscious decision that they had to adapt to meet the rising challenges of the times. To do so, they adapted by adopting what they saw as desirable strengths from models in the West, just as they had previously adopted other aspects of their society from other influences. This realization, decision, and adaptation came in Japanese society earlier than it did in many other Asian societies like the far larger behemoth to the West known as China. Of course, that country too would eventually adapt to the changing world. Just as Japan has learned from others, Japan has come to teach others plenty of lessons itself and the others who once taught them have learned in turn. The same threatens to be true for China as well.
Again, Mike, respectfully, I agree that industrialization and Western influence has profoundly shaped Japan’s history and current status in the world. But, I am strongly against the notion that Western influence “saved” the Japanese from themselves, from some certain demise they would’ve wrecked upon themselves. The Japanese adapting was a choice that they ultimately made by and for themselves. It wasn’t as if Admiral Perry came to Japan, took over, and altruistically declared “I’m going to rescue you all from yourselves by making you learn to be more like us!”
Okay, the missionaries did.
But that’s another matter for another day. My point here is that it is grossly ethnocentric and patriarchal to suggest that one society “saved” another society from itself as if the latter society was inherently diseased and dying were it not for the altrustic doctoring of the former. There was far less “saving” by “the West” and far more mere “adapting” by “the East”. There was far more “exploiting” by “the West” and far less “welcoming our saviors” by “the East”. Understanding this simple truth should be sufficient to quash any misguided attempts to frame all of this in anything remotely sounding like “we saved you”.
Kai,
I only used “Western” because that’s what was being used and that’s what most people would understand. It was actually the less developed/less industrialized learning from and being inspired by the more developed/more industrialized; that’s how it is 99% of the time(I wouldn’t feel weird saying European country A was inspired to develop or industrialized by European country B). Do you think that if Japan hadn’t been inspired or motivated or coerced by the Germans, Brits, Dutch, Portuguese and Americans that they would have been able to colonize Korea and China and defeat Russia?
Mike Fish,
I think you’ll agree that this was not what we were talking about. I wasn’t arguing that Japan could colonize Korea and China and defeat Russia without Western influence or learning things from the West, I was arguing against the idea that Western influence “saved” the Japanese. Saved them from what?
Your previous response argued that Western influence “saved” the Japanese from “devolving into some sort of perpetual civil war” and “chaos and collapse”. I disagreed. There’s no reason to believe such an absolute and concrete eventuality absent Western influence. Imagine the absurdity of suggesting that European civilization would’ve descended into chaos and collapse without the Chinese invention of paper or compass. How utterly ludicrous. History would have played out differently, certainly, but to what degree and extent we cannot possibly know. It is supremely egotistical (and I’m not saying you’re intentionally trying to be this way) for one society to think they “saved” another society, that they were the latter society’s “salvation”.
This, again, is my objection to some of the comments uttered by some people here.
Kai,
Saved them from what? Saved them from Russia, the US, Germany, Portugual, Netherlands, and Britain calling “dibbs” and trying to make them a colony. If Japan had gone the other way, even slightly, and not adopted a Prussian military and legal model, and hadn’t embraced “developed world” colonialism with a focus on acquiring natural resources and cannon fodder, one of the “developed world” would have tried and possibly succeeded in making them their bitch. Which other country in far East Asia was never a colony of a “developed world” country? They were all either a colony of a Western power or Japan. Japan was only in that position because it seriously decided to develop before the others. Combine the industrial revolution, a new legal system and form of government, military reorganization(all from developed countries all in the “West”), with all that great homegrown Japanese stuff and you get the product that became a hemispheric super power in a few decades. I stick to my insanity, but clarify, Japan was saved by modernization, industrialization, and better government, most of which came from the “developed world” which did happen to mostly be in the West.
Mike Fish,
Which is not nearly the same thing as “devolving into some sort of perpetual civil war” or “chaos and collapse”.
Mike, I fully agree that Japan adapting to the threats of “the West” helped it manage those threats, whether those threats were from “Russia, the US, Germany, Portugual, Netherlands, and Britain”. I agree also that its adaptations involved adoption of Western models of industrialization, modernization, political reform, militarism, etc. I’m not in disagreement with any of these things, and I don’t understand why you keep pressing this point that we already agree upon.
…which is the same thing as what I already said earlier:
“The Meiji Restoration accelerated the industrialization of Japan, preparing it to meet with the rising colonialism of the West…
This realization, decision, and adaptation came in Japanese society earlier than it did in many other Asian societies like the far larger behemoth to the West known as China.
Clarification is good. What I’m trying to explain is the qualitative difference between “A saving B” and “B changing by emulating, adapting to, or learning from B”. Japan changed from its exposure to, interaction with, and being challenged by the West.
Was it “saved?” It was saved from certain possibilities, like being continually bullied by Western powers (which arguably happened to China and other Asian nations)…but they weren’t saved from this eventuality BY “the West” NOR were they saved from “themselves”. They were saved from that specific possibility by their own choice to adapt, to prepare against that possibility. They saved themselves by becoming more like the potential enemy they feared. They learned the strengths of the threat and adopted them. This truth should never be presented in any tone suggesting “the West” altruistically saved the Japanese, or that the Japanese would’ve imploded or something had Westerners never come along.
Are you following me here?
Do you follow me that I never said the West saved Japan?
Mike Fish,
First, just in case, I want to apologize if my last “are you following me here” came across in any negative or confrontational way. I asked it mostly to reinforce that a lot of what you just said echoes what I had already said, which was confusing because people don’t usually talk at length about something they already recognize the other party as knowing and agreeing to. You repeating what I said made it seem like you didn’t recognize our agreement.
Second, I beg you to review how this conversation thread developed, especially your first comment in response to mine where you start off with: “Actually…”
“Actually” what? I interpreted this as you disagreeing with what I wrote in response to DUKE FLEED, where I stated:
I interpreted “Actually…” as you disagreeing with my disagreement, that you actually think it is NOT historically accurate and reasonably intelligent to say Japan was doing just fine on its own, that their society was INDEED dying before Westerners intervened and saved them. You going on to allude to “perpetual civil war” and “chaos and collapse” reinforced this interpretation of your comment and position.
If you want to say now that you didn’t mean it that way, that’s fine. However, I’m hoping you understand why I did, in fact, interpret you as saying something along the lines of “the West saved Japan”.
Kai,
You are correct that my “actually” could be interpreted that way. Actually, I did mean it to be a negative segue, but not to say the West saved Japan. I definately didn’t suggest Japanese society was on the verge of collapse. A country collapsing and its society collapsing would be two very different things. Do you think it wouldn’t have been possible,maybe even easy, if the right leaders hadn’t adopted the right central military, political, and industrial policies, for Japan to have devolved into a broken warlord state similar to China from 1911-1949?
Mike Fish,
I agree there’s a distinction between “society” and “country” but I’m still hesitant to suggest such a definitive consequence as “collapse” for Japanese society or country absent Western influence.
Sure, absent a strong central government, Japan could’ve became a warlord state…not only like China from 1911-1949 but frankly like many periods of time throughout its own history. A fractioning of power in a society has happened many times in the history of many societies but it doesn’t necessarily spell that society’s doom, just as Sun Yat-Sen and Chiang Kai-Shek’s Republican era for China didn’t spell the end of Chinese society either. Power and strength waxes and wanes.
And that waxing and waning needs to be seen in context, in reference to something. Japan becoming a warlord state wouldn’t have been something new for Japan just as warlordism post-Qing Dynasty wasn’t new to China. It doesn’t suggest perpetual chaos or eventual collapse, it’s just a state of being (for the society) after a centralizing force loses power and before a centralizing force gains power.
Warlordism only makes a society “weaker” or “broken” in reference to external threats AND in juxtaposition to a “unified whole”. A unified group is stronger against an external threat than a divided group, but division in the group alone does not suggest eventual demise of that society. Of course, taking your distinction between society and country, we can agree that it is the demise of the previous unity of the previous “country”.
The Meiji Restoration was indeed a substantial change for Japanese society, arguably a revolution or even a coup. The previous “system” died and was replaced. We can certainly hypothesize that the previous “system” could’ve led Japan into further into Western colonialism victimhood. We can certainly hypothesize that without the strong centralization of the Meiji Restoration, rival factions and warlords could’ve splintered the previous system and thus Japanese society. I would grant that the destruction of the previous political system could be characterized as “chaos and collapse” but, as I’ve made clear, I wouldn’t go further to suggest this was the end of Japanese society, that there would be perpetual civil war, that they could never get out of warlordism.
What I’m objecting to here is not what could’ve happened to Japan absent the Meiji Restoration and the adoption of Western technology and practices that came with it. What I’m objecting to here are Westerners who cop a revisionist tone in now suggesting that the Japanese should somehow thank the West for the Meiji Restoration, that without “the West” or “Western influence” Japan would’ve become a victim of colonialism. Well, Japan wouldn’t have become a victim of colonialism if there wasn’t Western colonialism in the first place! The Meiji Restoration was a response to Western imperialism, a conscious adaptation to meet a threat, to survive in a new era ushered in and imposed upon others by the West.
When I say these societies were doing just fine before the West, I’m serious. They were doing just fine. They were living their lives, shit would occassionally happen as it always did, but they survived and evolved on their own, just as the Native Americans got along just fine before Europeans landed. Any “industrialization” and “modernization” they subsequently emulated from the West was a necessary response to Western threats imposed upon them, not some gift altruistically given to them from the West purely for their benefit. The West influenced the course of Japan’s history, but when we say “saved”, we have to specify who was saved, from what, and by what.
The Japanese behind the Meiji Restoration “saved” Japan FROM the Western imperialist colonization and exploitation that threatened them BY adopting the Western imperialist attitudes they were exposed to.
Again, I’m not arguing the possible consequences of a Japan that didn’t have the Meiji Restoration when it did. I’m arguing against it being co-opted or revised into something “the West” benevolently bestowed upon the Japanese, that “the West” saved them from themselves. This was my disagreement with DUKE FLEED and some other commenters (I think it was Fike2308) when this issue cropped up earlier. I hope we’re clear on what we agree, what we disagree, and more importantly, what each other’s motivation was in commenting in the first place.
Again,
I’m not for thanking “The West”, more like thanking those innovators and the better systems, better technologies, and better ideas they created or brought with them, wherever they are from. They are better because they are better, not because they are Western, right? But, if in this case they happen to all or mostly be from the West, don’t get mad at me.
Two final things:
1. I hope you don’t assume I’m a Westerner
2. I’m happy to have an excellent conversation about Japan that doesn’t involve the typical cliched lies and simplistic biases that I usually hear from most people, on either side
Mike Fish,
I have no problems with being appreciative of the things we consider “better”. I only have problems with people who think the West ought to be thanked for “saving” the East. It just isn’t so simple to me because things both good and bad, beneficial and detrimental came from the West. I’m fine with recognizing the impact and influence but I hesitate at any suggestion that anyone owes anyone anything. It’s just too complex for any one side to be given all the credit or all the blame.
Likewise, one of the things I often respond to Chinese fenqing with when they start blaming the West for historically exploiting and interfering in China is that the Chinese realistically need to assume a measure of responsibility themselves, for not getting their act together and defending or fighting for their own interests. The one who wrongs you is still responsible for what they did, but you’re still responsible for guarding yourself against those who would wrong you. The responsibility of each does not negate the culpability of the other.
1. I don’t think I have assumed you were a Westerner. I’m not criticizing you as a person as much as I am critizing a widely held but offensive belief.
2. Cheers, I enjoyed our conversation as well. Even with the misunderstandings, I think we were both arguing substance and genuinely trying to share our points.
The “western model” is to expand and control areas that have access to energy. By that standard, that is what Japan tried to do.
And by “western model” I mean human model.
[Python: I said before I DON'T accept ANY complaint on my moderation rules. Next time I will just click "delete" button.]
Ok “moderator”, are you saying that from now on I am banned to post under my current nick name?
1) This is our 4th war in Afghanistan (1839, 1878, 1919 were the start dates of our previous wars)
2) What the hell does all this have to do with the sentence passed on a drug smuggler?
3) You are a nationalistic idiot.
FOARP, why are you so enthusiastic to accuse Roadblock of being “nationalistic”? Do you know what nationality Roadblock is? Or is it just because he said something that is against your position, or can be construed as defending China? Are all people who defend China “nationalistic idiots” to you because you automatically assume them to be Chinese nationals?
1) Thanks for reinforcing my argument.
2) I am mainly responding to a previous comment on the relevance of colonialism.
3) How so?
[moderated: personal insult]
So, by the same token, the Nazis were superior to the French, the Jews, the Poles, the Danish, the Swedish, the Dutch, etc.? The barbarians were superior to the Romans? The Huns and the Mongols superior to Europeans? The Turks superior to the Greeks? The Spartans superior to the Athenian?
Well, sure, they were superior – in might. They were not superior in morality, but then according to Nietzsche, morality the weapon of the weak.
One thing’s for sure, though. If the tables were turned, China would do the exact same thing. Just look at Xinjiang and Tibet.
Nietzsche is a psycho and a nihilist, I’m neither.
How could you know for sure that China would do the same thing? I think the Chinese are the kind of people who would rather not involve themselves with “the barbarians”. Just look at the Great Wall.
Is there a limit to the amount of times you can Godwin a thread?
@roadblock’s “just look at the great walL” statement, c’mon man, now that’s just dumb. They didn’t build it outta the high principles u are suggesting here
Roadblock,
You’re reaching, man. For you to claim that the British sending troops to stabilize Afghanistan and prevent the Taliban from again dominating the region is a form of colonialism is quite hilarious. You try hard.
In Chinese eyes, this guy isn’t even British.
This story did make the front page of any of the major British newspapers – why is Xinhua making such a big thing out of it?
I support this. Would be nice if they cracked down on all of the NIGERIANS roaming around the bar streets of Beijing though. Nothing more annoying than being out for a drink and having some fool approach me asking “yo, u wan a joint?”
Saw this story awhile back:
“Dongguan Times. June 24, 2009. A Nigerian man charged with drug trafficking in Dongguan was found guilty and sentenced to death yesterday, reports today’s Dongguan Times . Both Osonwa Okey Noberts and his girlfriend, Zhang Dongxiang, received the death penalty for selling heroin to Chinese drug dealers…”
from http://www.wikio.com/world/asia/china/dongguan – Link to story on Danwei.(Currently down)
There wasn’t much of an international media fuss over that case.
He was executed on or before the 26th June – to mark Anti-drug day.
http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/1034011/China-executes-20-for-anti-drug-day
Because a single one is just a drop in the bucket. And Nigeria doesn’t care about its people, bad or good ones. Would be nice if China would go on an anti-drug rampage.
Eh, Nigeria has a capital punishment system also – if this dude committed this crime in Nigeria and was busted he’d be put to death too so *why* do you think Nigeria would try to stop China from carrying this out when he commits it here? Most of the interference happens when a country who does NOT support the death penalty for a given crime has a citizen who is being put to death for that crime in another country. This is not the case here.
why? so there can be a war in china on drugs? i like china better when i’m high…
Best comment ever. And I agree.
Kill the fool. One less evil in the world.
The stupid data on death penalty doesn’t stop crime is non-sense. You put 10 children in a room and a pedophile you have big problem.
Put bullet in pedo’s head and no raped children. Say Human Rights and say to pedo man, “you not bad, you mind just one fucking mess”. Pedo man will go “thank you hehe I will fuck your children now”.
Death to all law breakers.
Smash the criminals, you smash crime. Smash crime you have no crime. No crime means no problem. No problem means I can get BMW 7 series.
No, if you instead give the pedo 10 of your neighburs children you are human and have no problem.
Worth having a read of this, perhaps….
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/oct/13/mentally-ill-briton-china-execution
the TS writes .. no history of mental illness .. so that seems proof enough that he is not insane in pretty china.
the guardian writes:
“Shaikh … told officials he had been given the case in Kyrgyzstan by a man who had promised to make him a pop star in China. … He had moved to Poland telling friends he planned to start an airline …”
brainwashed mainstream controlled media is your opium china.
Let they guy go, he holds a uk passport.
So what?
i agree! they should let him go…drop him off in the middle of the mob…
First up, a confession: I’m British.
Now that’s out of the way, two things:
1.
People should abide by the local laws of the country they are in, and ignorance / not understanding the language isn’t an excuse.
2.
Any country will seek to protect its citizens, especially in cases with sentences of long-term detention or capital punishment (the latter of which does not exist in the UK). China doesn’t have a fantastic record with respect to due process, and any suggestions of mental problems should be investigated before sentence is passed.
For a differently-biased account:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8304562.stm
Those things taken into account, if the gentleman concerned has no medical reasons for exemption and is found guilty by proper legal process, then there is no reason why he should not face the judgement of the court.
DWR
They are going to shoot him and mail the cost of the bullet to his mother….
I am amazed at the childishness that is displayed in this forum. People use it to attack each other and their cultures rather than discuss the subject at hand. Anyone that is a DRUG DEALER OR DRUG SMUGGLER should be shot while escaping. This saves the cost of a trial! However, I do have issue with the comments of some of the neitzen. Every race has both bad and good people. We, as citizens of the world must work together to rid the world of scum drug smugglers and dealers. Death to all of them.
Agree Michael. Unit as one and kill all drug smugglers. They are all paper tigers.
Why is this even an issue? The guy is either a) a dumbass or b) crazy. Either of which, he deserves the penalty that he got because he broke the law.
And why are the family crying now? Why didn’t they try and stop the crazy dumbass before he went off and did this shit? They’ll use his sanity as a defense but won’t use it to prevent him from causing harm?
FUCK THAT.
His death will be at the hands of his retarded family if he really is crazy. And if he’s a dumbass, his death will be at the hands of his own stupid self.
I don’t accept the notion that Britain is out “just trying to meddle in the Chinese judicial system”. Often when a country like Britain does not impose capital punishment, there are laws set up requiring them to officially protest when one of their citizens face the death penalty in another country. I know it is this way with Canada. Not sure about the UK.
So whether or not the British government actually cares about this dude, it’s worth considering that by law, they may to forced to protest. Food for thought…
I agree with your assessment.
It’s a matter of due diligence, and they’re just covering their asses to show their public that they will go to bat for their countrymen should an issue arise. Quite frankly their statements about “He thought he was going to be a popstar” etc are laughable…but I think they probably know that too. I can imagine the embassy rep who first talked to him having drinks with his friends that night, “this fuckin joker said he was carrying 4 kilos of H into China because some people told him they’d make him a pop star” followed by a resounding laugh across the table.
Loved the Chinese comment: ” if you cheat in an exam, you die”. The poster was referring to earlier dynasties. Shit, we have just offed 75% of modern Chinese youth.
95%
I think it’s harsh that so many people are able to determine the fairness of his sentence from a few newspaper articles (biased or non-biased). It would be nice if someone with a little more insight to the case would comment, instead of the usual groundless ‘he had it coming’ comments.
“Law charity Reprieve [a human rights group] said Mr Shaikh has a psychological disorder and was duped into carrying the luggage by a man from Kyrgyzstan.” (UKPA)
“Reprieve said it has so far been unsuccessful in getting Shaikh evaluated by a psychologist.” (Brisbane Times @ Google News)
What kind of court system would not even allow for a psychological examination? going on… “He seemed to acknowledge that both Reprieve and the British government had raised doubts over Shaikh’s mental condition but said they “didn’t offer proof.”"
Well… it’s kinda hard to establish a mental disorder, if no doctors have been allowed to examine him. Regardless of whether it’s a tactic from their side or if he really has mental problems, they should be allowed to explore it. And for expats to condone a justice system that doesn’t allow for something that basic I think is unfortunate.
I’m not saying it’s an unfair sentence, I’m just saying that this is a very narrow basis for judging him.
Btw. the polls are kinda funny in a tragic way. Chinese mob mentality scares me.
“Btw. the polls are kinda funny in a tragic way. Chinese mob mentality scares me.”
98% of Global Times polls carry headlines (that’s right- they make headlines about their own absurdly leading polls taken from the, let’s say, probably somewhat self-selecting group of foaming-at-the-mouth Sino-fascists who read their site) that amount to “90%+ of netizens thinks [foreign enemy of the week] should be severely punished for [perceived offense to China]” It is kind of scary, but I would guess the results are a BIT skewed.
Well said. Kudos.
You people are really full of moral disapproval of drug use/sale. I should be able to destroy my life in the manner that I see fit without some government interfering.
And the death penalty is savage and retrograde. Any country that recognizes this on a moral level has an obligation to stand up for its citizens when another government attempts to invoke it on them. It’s not going to work most of the time, but standing up for the moral code is a good thing and does not infringe upon other countries’ sovereignty.
Yes, you may have the right to destroy yourself. But you definitely do not have the liberty to enable, encourage or assist others in their pursuits of self-destruction.
Failure to distinguish law from morality is dangerous.
That’s your opinion, and that’s your right.
This happened in China. Not in a country to which you may impose your personal opinion or morals. Because you don’t give a shit if someone takes their shoes off when they come to your house does not mean it’s OK for you to leave yours on when you go to someone else’s house, no?
This guy isn’t a drug USER, either, destroying HIS body. He is a drug trafficker. He was moving 4 KG of H. Perhaps you shouldn’t pretend to know how it is used, because your opinion clearly demonstrates you have no idea. “The death penalty is savage and retrograde” – aaaahahahahahaaa….another case of a middle class pussy lib expecting everyone else to flex to their ’superior humanity’ while they ignore and disrespect cultural/social norms outside of their familiarity.
Okay, so those who knowingly sell cigarettes and alcohol should also be prosecuted. You’re making completely arbitrary (or really, socially formed) distinctions that follow no logic. (Hard) drugs are generally a bad idea, but I’m not sure why anyone should be punished for going through with a transaction between two consenting adults.
And I was just expressing a philosophical point. The fact that this happened in China has no bearing. If I commit a crime in China, yeah, I expect to be punished by Chinese law. I don’t expect philosophy to save me in any way.
Knowledge and acceptance of consequences is a far different thing from acknowledgment that those consequences are justified.
Comparing H to cigarettes is different. Some drugs have been used specifically in creating intentional addiction for use in controlling say, prostitution, often in underage women. Stick a bitch with a few H bombs and she’ll be so physically addicted her life is in your hands – consenting adults? I don’t know any pimps who get women addicted to cigarettes with the intention of pimping them out with smokes as rations, but hey, anything can happen. There is where you are wrong. You are supporting a drug trafficker under the presumption that all transactions made will be between two consenting adults who are using the drugs for personal recreational or whatever use with full knowledge of what they’re getting into. Perhaps when _you_ use, that’s the case, but you can’t possibly assume everyone shares your insights, control, or situation.
1. My distinction is not “arbitrary”, nor “socially informed”. You’re making another assumption that I don’t have a solid understanding of various drug compositions, effects, properties, or results of abused use.
2. Your comparison between selling something legally that is controlled by (or supposed to be) gov’t board/safety organizations in terms of chemical purities and safety mechanisms to prevent abuse and smuggling in something clearly illegal with absolutely no controls in place to guarantee some form of safety for the consumers is nothing more than a misleading juxtaposition.
3. You’re not even touching on the fact that illegal smuggling of drugs often supports organized crime, often has many death/abuse/other influences as a result of transactions and/or the organization around the dealing itself, destroys many more lives than the bachelor individual who abuses nobody more than themselves when they’re H’d out, etc.
hehe, unless you consider the cigarette companies “pimps”, in which case, after the first few, you’re pretty much their ‘bitch’ for life.
what you need to understand is is that when you do drugs like that not only are you hurting yourself, but also others around you. Like when you smoke you not only damage your lungs, and raise your own risk of cancer, but the people around you who don’t smoke can get second-hand smoke even if they themselves don’t smoke.
A guy on meth will make you bold and daring, but at the same time you will hallucinate things that aren’t there and might hurt others.
So the fact is is that while your damaging yourself you will eventually harm others who are around, and close to you.
The one who has “delusional psychosis and bipolar disorder” is the British media.
[moderate: deleted the personal insult part]
it’s a sad fact that much of the UK cannabis trade is now run by Chinese. Just one recent example:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article6723735.ece
The guys in the article got about 5 years for 222 million RMB worth of drugs. Death for 4kilos of smack seems a bit excessive.
I have a question about the survey. Were the only three options those? If so, its a bit of a bad survey.
53.9+30.1+16.0=100
“In another survey that asks “What do you think of British media’s report on this incident”:
53.9% (1924 votes) think these reports show Britain still has an outdated colonial mindset;
30.1% (1074 votes) think the British media is using “human rights” as an excuse;
16.0% (569 votes) think they are sensationalizing this incident with malicious intentions.”
Of course those were the only three. All of their polls are like that, the Global Times is a joke.
Just say NO
To everyone that believes it’s ok to execute this man: One day you will stand before God. Think careful about what your heart believes. Do you want a man to die? Even if they are guilty or bad, can you take their life? If I give you the gun, will you pull the trigger? Then you are also a murderer. You are just as bad.
Standing before God as standing in front of your imaginary friend? hmmm, k, that means a lot, rofl.
and the gods will sent the guy into hell anyways, we’re just making their job a bit easier. not every here is Christian you know.
Why did God make poppies? Why did God let people figure out how to make heroine from them? Why did God let Afghanistan go to shit and become the H supplier to the world? Why did God let Suzanne Sommers get old? Why did he give Dick in China such a small penis? If there is a God, he’s a total asshole.
God must understand that this man is hardly called a human being,the heroin he smuggled can destroy hundreds people and their families,push them all to the deep hell.
for the justice and his holy love ,this criminal must take his penalty,no matter he is a Chinese or british.If God does not understand this,then he is not God…
he must not have cleared with local mafia before he went into the drug trafficking business. lesson here is do not deal drugs in China unless you can sure that you won’t be caught have a ready escape route into Burma/Laos. Which is why most external drug dealing into China are done with HKer’s or Thais rather than the Brits.
That guy just didn’t make friends with the right people or make enough friends. I’m glad they’re gonna axe this guy. I wish more countries in the west would start doing this to all of their drug dealers too. Problem is it would decimate a huge population of poor young people. The problem with that is there’d be no one to join the military.
From what I understand, there are a lot of drugs entering China these days through the Golden Triangle. Nobody wants to admit it though.
Let him go. He is from a great nation. He holds a UK passport witch stands for dignity. We would never ever kill a chinese this way and you should let this man go. Give him a piece of mind, airline ticket and a bunch of money so he does not have to turn to crime when poor.
Give this stunning british citizen another chance.
Well, im jewish and i would be angry if he was a jew. I dont think he is so let him die. I will laugh out loud if i find the video on Internet. Sorry scumbag, you have the wrong race and wrong friends to pull off a dirty trick like this. Chinese would never kill a jew since our MOSSAD is 1000 times more scary then the local triads. No one fucks with jews.
By comparing Israeli intelligence agency to Chinese organized crime, are you trying to say the MOSSAD’s activity are criminal or triad’s crimes are patriotic?
I am an Australian who travels frequently to China. In the airports there are huge signs warning people of the legal consequences of trying to bring in illegal drugs. Can’t people read!!!?? China has every right to keep this scourge out of their country. I am tired of foreigners flouting the law then expecting some sweet deal. Get a life!! He needs to take responsibility for his own actions.
The law is clear in China (and is not pretty soft in Western Countries either anyway). I’m a foreigner in China and I used to have arguments with my previous roommate because he was taking drugs and I didn’t want to be expelled from here (if policeman had come to our place, they would have considered that all of us were on drugs).
I’m not in favor of death penalty, I don’t think that states should have the right to kill, but the law is like that here and thus, anybody has to respect it. Embassies make enough recommendations before somebody comes to China, if somebody doesn’t respect Chinese laws in China, he hereby has to be punished according to this law.
If a Chinese person was committing punished crimes in Western Countries, it would be the same: he would be punished according to Western laws. So no need for the British embassy to waste its time with this criminal.
The PRC should apply the law, if he broke the law, and it says that he should be killed by smuggling drugs into China, then he must be killed. This is to set an example that no one is above law, Chinese nor foreigners.
This is why people should know the laws of a land before they decide to break them.
I can’t say I’m as heartless not to feel anything for a perosn sentenced to lose their life, but I feel just as much for someone’s child, daughter, son, sister or brother that are losing their life over the poison people like him make a living off of.
If he had any compassion for those people or their family,he wouldn’t have been smuggling drugs and wouldn’t be in this situation, so it is what it is. I understand the arguments against death, but I can’t bring myself to defend a drug dealer.
I feel that all faith I had in China has disappeared. There is no better way to show the rest of the world you are still a developing and close-minded country than unfairly murdering a man.
He broke the law yes, he should be punished okay. But nothing is ever that simple. There has been no proper examination to see if this man really is ill,
“The accused had said that he and his family members had no history of mental diseases, Ma said.”
This isn’t evidence of anything, if you had any understanding of mental illnesses then you would know that people with serious illnesses (like this man who disappeared from his home and family in Britain only to be convinced that trafficking drugs will make him a popstar) won’t admit that they are ill. It is part of the illness. There has been no proper examination, when there should be several.
I know its a hard concept for many of you to grasp but we aren’t in the dark ages and everyone should be able to understand basic HUMAN RIGHTS.
“He broke the law yes, he should be punished okay.”
The punishment for the law this man broke is death.
Far be it for me to judge a man’s sanity on the internet but let’s face it, there is an enormous incentive for the man to act crazy.
In China, criminal do not get the chance to get a psychiatrist to analyze their behavior, declare them insane/incapable to stand trial and sent to a psychiatric care facility only to miraculously recover a few years later. If the man has enough autonomy to negotiate a drug deal in central Asia and hop on a plane to western China than he must suffer the consequences.
I think people are confusing a fair trial with a fair trial according to the norms in Britain. What he deserves is the same kind of trial conditions that a typical Chinese criminal would get, not a slew of psychiatrists that drags out the procedures for years exhausting appeal after appeal with no end in sight. I get that Britons consider the death penalty barbaric and Chinese legal code unsophisticated/unfair but that has no bearing on this case. Chinese law is not up for interpretation here, the moment he arrived in China, he has implicitly agree to obey the laws there.
“The punishment for the law this man broke is death.”
It is this black and white view that is really upsetting. The fact that they are not taking into account the fact that he is a foreigner, who is seemingly ill (he is NOT acting “crazy”, it his family from accross the world who are appealing this) and probably lacked any real understanding of what he was doing is unjustifiable.
And this has nothing to do with what Brits think, or Americans or whoever. I understand that the law is the way it is, what I find really disturbing is the Chinese masses who are completely unforgiving and rallying against this man, I never knew humans, from whatever country, could be so heartless and lack any form of compassion.
I have seen such a warm and great side of Chinese people, yet there is some lack of understanding of the value of human life.
Showing the same warmth and greatness to a drug smuggler?…… think really hard about that retarded logic of yours.
ezo,
life of every individual human is to be valued correct?
so what the hell are the militaries in all the developed and developing nations doing building weapons and armies for? it’s probably for defense so when attacked by enemies, they can kill them right? and in that case, no mercy to the people trying to kill you huh? and soldiers are celebrated as heros back home with special parades and celebration days for the occasion also…where’s the compassion for the enemies killed? now…is this the value of life China is missing…i don’t get it….taking other people’s lives is either right or wrong, there should be no gray areas…which one would you take?
Developing China. Unless you have something to actually contribute apart from calling my opinion “retarded” please don’t bother me with your close-mindedness.
Jacare, from your comments above and below, you don’t really seem like someone worth have any discussion with.
It is impossible to communicate with people like this.
Ezo,
I do have something to contribute. Try reading the post again before the word “retard”, you retard. Or can you only digest words at the end of sentences dumbass.
The fact that they are not taking into account the fact that he is a foreigner
The fact that he is a foreigner should have no bearing on this case, I don’t know what you are trying to say here.
he is NOT acting “crazy”, it his family from accross the world who are appealing this
His is not first family to appeal for a convicted criminal, again this doesn’t say much.
probably lacked any real understanding of what he was doing I don’t think any of us can know this.
what I find really disturbing is the Chinese masses who are completely unforgiving and rallying against this man…so heartless…
I am sorry that I may have contributed to your souring opinion of Chinese people, perhaps I should have been less callous with how I phrased that last comment but I honestly have very little compassion for this peddler of addiction and disease.
I agree, why support trash? You enjoy living with trash?
LOL! JiaYou modern combo of Ghandi/Mother Theresa fighting for the value of human life, sitting on your arse criticizing a whole nation of people…
go find a charity to work with or some heroin to smuggle or something… this will make THE Chinese people understand the value of human life
Um yeah China couldn’t give two shits about whether he’s a foreigner or not. The fact is is that China has enough issues to deal with and the last thing they need is a load of H going around and fucking up people’s mind. The Chinese aren’t being heartless they are just showing how much it means to abide to the laws or pay the consequences.
Ignorance to this doesn’t excuse you from the punishment.
“I feel that all faith I had in China has disappeared.”
Good on ya mate.
Entering a country is like installing an app on your computer. You may not be patient enough to read all the terms and conditions but once you tick the box, you are subject to whatever you might have blindly agreed with.
And don’t take it as every Chinese person agrees with death penalty for drug trafficking. Draconian as it might appear, it’s how it is. I don’t even want to mention the Opium War and its impact on the modern Chinese laws regarding drugs.
Tip: do your homework and read the small print instead of complaining to your mobile carrier that you got charged 5 dollars a minute by just talking to some hot girl.
All this fuzz for someone who was trafficking some drugs…that dude probably weighed what was more worthwhile: beat the system and enjoy the money or his life if he loses…he chose the money….dumb man? aren’t we to live our days like it would be our last?
And for those bitching about the law…there is not a right or wrong about any law…laws are decided (by group of people with similar views) solely based on what seemed to be the best set of rules or standards at the time they are drafted (based on morals, ethics, history, science or whatever) and it sucks, since we’re just born into it…so…we can all fight to change it, or go smuggle some h, and have some cash to spend on hookers/gigolos and live happily ever after…
If he really did the crime, and not because someone tricked him, I can’t say I feel too sorry for this guy. IF that’s the case, there are far more innocent people dying every day that I could care more about.
What gives me pause is my lack of faith in China’s justice system. Maybe someone who knows more about how law works in China can weigh in, I only know bits and pieces. From what I understand, it’s not an “innocent until proven guilty” system. It’s more like “guilty until proven innocent”. And maybe there wouldn’t be time to prove your innocence if the few officials who decide your fate decide it quickly and you’re on your way to be shot in the head before you know what hit you. And from what I understand, it’s not easy to get cases appealed.
I’d hate to have someone slip some heroine or something into my baggage in China and getting me the death sentence. That’s why I don’t travel with too much baggage when I go to China, I keep a close eye on what I have, I never buy anything that could possibly be used to hide drugs (no giant sculptures, ha) AND refuse to ever bring anything across any Chinese borders for anyone. But maybe not everyone is as careful (paranoid) as I am.
Someone tried to get me to bring some baby formula into China. If I were less careful, I might have said yes, that “formula” might be heroine, then I’d likely be caught and sentenced to death in short order and the press in China would make sure I look guilty as all get out.
I don’t know if this guy is innocent, but I don’t know for sure if he’s guilty, either. Sure, the report says he’s guilty, and it looks really bad that his only defense seem to be “insanity”, but since I don’t know anything beyond that, I’ll just leave it at “I don’t know.” Was he tricked? Did he know what he was doing? I don’t know.
Of course, even though it’s not really exactly the same, I’m sure some people are reminded of the British opium trade in China during the colonial era (which was done by the British for the purpose of weakening the Chinese and strengthening British power in the region), and that’s why a lot of Chinese seem to feel so strongly about this. This bit of history might also contribute to why China have such especially harsh laws for this particular crime to this day.
I love the poll! It surveys a population of which 99.99% have never had any exposure to the British media, and then gives them these three choices
* outdated and colonial
* uses “human rights” as excuse (bad human rights!)
* malicious
4 kg of Heroin is serious, there is no way he should be left off the hook for that. Death sentences are questionable anywhere, but 4 kg of Heroin is just utterly indefensible.
If this dude was just bringing some marajuana and hash over the border for personal use and got the death pentalty, then I feel bad for him.
If he was smuggling copious amounts of hard drugs with intent to sell, then ‘Death’ is just a calculated risk he took.
Crime is committed on the Chinese soil, and must be punished on the chinese soil according to local law. Whatever the nationality of the criminal, he should assume the sentence. No pitty for drug traffickers, they are all criminals. Very simple. Be radical and proud : no negociation needed. He is a criminal.
Fuck the law coz these mother fuckers shouting “must die” coz he broke the “chinese law” are law breakers themselves.I have seen chinese people disrespecting and breaking their own traffic laws,yelling at cops and taking the shit further to always sniff cocaine openly in KTV’s,bars and clubs without fear thereby making themselves law breakers of the highest order.
The fact is,if you don’t like something,it will be extremely difficult to be enticed with it no matter what.For Christ sake,drug is not something that a man can be easily enticed with so those who sniff it are more to blame than the sellers coz if they stop buying,the seller will be out of business.
Statistics according to study shows that humans are more likely do indulge in a business that commands more sales so fuck it with the blame and shit on the British sucker.
I hate drugs and left for me,drug dealers will be out of business if they’re waiting on me to make money from their drug business.Those who take drugs are evil people and honestly those who take it think taking drug makes you a HARD nigga.
That’s not Cocaine in those KTV bars. It’s Ketamine powder, otherwise known as Special K.
People kill people and go to jail without a death sentence and drug shouldn’t command such sentence and if he was gonna be given a death sentence,it would be better to arrest the buyers too and fuck them all up after all the buyers are mostly chinese.
Most Chinese men don’t like white boys coz they always lose their women to them so that’s why you suckers are yelling kill him and not coz the chinese law states that.This is just some personal individual selfish rage in exhibition here.
Now to you fucking drug dealers,quit fucking around and that includes you fucking drug takers too!
what are you talking about,your day dreams???we have a kg heroin smuggler here,can you just leave sex alone for a while? omg,how can I disscus legal matter with people like you…
You can forget what ever the Chinese say they are all programed by the communist party from birth. Their media is run by the communist party. There is no truthfull media there as well as their surveys are fixed to go with the party line. And they never get the real truth about any story. Chinese goverment has zero crediblity around the world. Remember Tianamin square.
I lived in NZ for almost 10 years,and look back to tianamen square,I ‘m sure that the goverment was right..If you can’t understand China interest ,then stop guessing,you indian madcow worship loser..
The government was right about how they handled Tienanmen Square? Really?
Initially I would like to be clear that I in no way agree with or support the death penalty.
However I do support a nations right to the sovereignty of it’s legal system. at the time of sentencing China had no clear definitions in either psychiatry or law for issues such as guardianship, compulsory treatment, and competency.(1). Therefore the mental competncy argument has no weight and the death penalty is legal in this case regardless.
While appeals of a humanitarian nature maybe made to the Chinese government, nobody has the right to judge their verdict.
1.Park L, Xiao ZP, Worth J, Park JM. Mental health care in China: recent changes and future challenges. Harvard Health Policy Rev 2005; 6: 36-45.
Taken from Comparing models of mental health service systems between Australia and China: implications for the future development of Chinese mental health service
(2008)
Speaking as a Brit – are we short on drug smugglers/dealers? NO so go ahead and excecute him PLEASE!!!! I dont give a shit if hes bipolar or whatever he knew what he was getting into and everyone is well aware NOT to carry other peoples things through an airport. I just wish we had the death penalty here in the UK so we could empty some of our prisons and get some more scum off the streets!!!
Wow. Love to see a hot debate here.
A couple thoughts here and also to clear some of the misconceptions too.
1. “Human Right”
This is term that I have seen often globally misrepresented. A. WHO defined the term of “Human Right” ;B. Under WHAT social belief? C. WHICH part of WHOSE right is more important?
These questions are very important when the term is cited or introduced to anywhere. Taken China for example.
A. The term a lot people now are using is not created by Chinese nor any Chinese has been involved in the process. So, do not expect they will agree nor
B. To say they are savages because ignorance of others’ culture does not equal to one’s superior being but a only blindly boost of self-esteem.
C. I am afraid to say in China, individual’s “Human Right” even of it’s life is defiantly not the most priority nor it is counted anywhere close to the front. It is explicitly expressed in all document and education materials in China that the “Right of the Collective” is the most important and any threats are to be eliminated and other Rights must be compromised. In this case, the integrity of the Chinese Law and being able to ENFORCE the law above one individual life by not setting a precedent under foreign political influence. Also, for the logic of capital punishment on drug trafficking is because the collective right of not being abused by any drug related activities is far more important than a single life. Killing a thousand innocents in order not to miss one guilty is something that has been developed from the last 5000 years in China. So deal with it.
Your “Human Right” is not the same thing of what the Chinese version.
2. “Due Process”
One problem the media has been criticizing is the due process of the trial that the court didn’t give a chance for the defendant to review and prove his bipolar disorder. If anyone work in the legal system would know due process is part of the game not the whole. Tens or maybe hundreds of motions in a trial in order to get a better position under the name of “Due Process”. For so many reports about the case, most of them are opinionated not facts or case detail related. This makes me wonder during the process, how much technical play the defense counsel has really played right. Why no plead bargaining has been discussed from the beginning? Why the defense position has changed several times. Why no one talked about whether there was something strategically wrong the defense tactic? Did diplomatic involvement and media help the case or ruin it? You want to play the game? You better play it right. Personally speaking, I think the defense side had made a lot of mistakes from the beginning till the end. Death probation plead should be first thing the defense team go after not anything else. Because, in criminal trials in China presumption of guilty is still the main stream principle not presumption of innocence. And forget about the UDHR or any other “International Declarations”, they are not Chinese law and can not be cited in court. PLAY WITH THE RULE!!!
3. “Poor Legal System” “Retaliation to the accusation Climate Change Summit” “Lack of Human Right”
One sentence for all media, governments and activist groups. Bigotry DO NOT WORK on Chinese. That’s why Shaikh got a over 98% of approval to death penalty from an online survey in China. All involvement from media and government only triggered a national urge to the capital penalty within the country. Do it smart next time. Chinese do not like foreign media. Trust me, Chinese think foreign media bull shit too much. This is not because they are “brain washed”, it is because they see things in a much different way. The guy could had been excused from death, if you guys hadn’t made it such a huge deal.
4. “Guilty? Not guilty?”
The defense side had been fighting for Shaikh’s innocent since the beginning. All the motions, tactics, and story telling are so familiar as it is no different to a regular criminal charge in anywhere else in the world. Judges, professionals and even regular people are tired of these “excuses”. Without further evidence, it is nearly impossible to save Shaikh from being caught red-handed.
Any way this is has come to the end. The guy was “convicted” and he is a dead meat. For people still believe he’s innocent. Hope you learn something from this case and know how to deal with such situation next time.
NEWS UPDATE – He’s dead
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8433285.stm
Good! THE GUY WAS A DRUG DEALER FOR CHRIST’S SAKE. Got evidence he was mentally ill? Then where was it shown on the news? and if you had the evidence, why wasn’t it shown? Your evidence would have helped convince many skeptics and yet it was all words words words and nothing more. If you really wanted to save the guy then you should have shown the certificates or evidence on the news BEFORE he was executed. So where was it? Where was the hardcore evidence that he was soooooooo mentally ill that it could have saved his life?
I can’t believe people who supported this man actually chowed down and digested this crap. One lesser evil the world I say. Good work China! Excellent! No mercy on drug dealers. I hope they all die. I really do! They start drug wars, created drug junkies, start crime. The execution itself has prevented a butterfly effect they would have caused a huge hazard to the world we live in. How do I know? You know any drug dealers that has created paradise through their disgusting and illegal industry? No.
I find it sad that anyone can take any form of gratification from the death of a human being. He was a drug dealer, but to even argue that he deserved to die, suggests that giving control over life and death to another human being is right. Using the death penalty to eradicate imperfections in any society will leave you only with a world full of perfect monsters.
200 years ago they drugged us, looted us, and when we tried to stop the drugs, they fought us
now with a million-men army, 3rd largest GDP, and a huge foreign reserve, they aint no pushing us no more
I’m not so sure that this was actually England’s foreign policy trying to sell drugs in China. Pretty sure it was just that one man taking it in there himself.
According to a source cited on wikipedia (eh~) the Chinese commissioner wanted the merchants to sign a waiver that forbade them from trafficking opium, or face the penalty, which the merchants refused to sign. Instead they accused Lin of destroying their property – Opium, illegal drug in China then as now, but at the time legal in Britain – the British sent troops to protect their drugs and drug dealers.
Two centuries later, look how far we have come, the British are angry over their executed citizen but did not ask for a reimbursement on their heroin.
No, I mean, TODAY it wasn’t their policy to sell it in China. Of course it was back during the Opium War days. I was just talking about today. As in, today, they aren’t pushing China to buy any drugs.
oh hmm haha reading back it’s actually pretty clear what you meant, oops.
http://news.xinhuanet.com/video/2009-12/30/content_12727541.htm
Correct me if I’m wrong, but this dickhead Ye Hai Lin is saying that a country’s laws should be respected, then complaining when Gordon Brown exercises his right to freedom of speech in expressing ‘disappointment’ etc.
What is it with the chip on these people’s shoulders?
He is not disappointed at Gordon Brown exercising his freedom of speech, rather the disappointment is over the content of the Brown’s speech. Put it another way, while I can respect it is your right to confuse and equivocate the two concepts I am not obligated to concur with your nonsense. Does that clear things up for you?
I think I’m clear – someone is allowed to have an opinion, as long as it is not critical and might hurt people’s feelings, is that right?
You are free to have an opinion, whatever they may be, doesn’t mean I have to agree or like it though.
Gordan Brown may feel angered, appalled and disappointed all he wants, and China executed a drug dealer as per laws of the land, and considers Brown’s comments intrusive and frankly, inappropriate. If he has a problem with Chinese law – apparently only when they are applied to British citizens – he should stop British citizens from traveling to China, and/or work out a system where he consults the Chinese government every time the British justice system sentences a Chinese national. Maybe then the Chinese government will offer quid pro quo considerations.
Yes because everyone is so often looking for that oh so hard to find justice in the UK. Especially people of other nations. When they visit that country their friends are always telling them to be careful because the Queen is the sole authority and can have you thrown in prison no matter what the laws say. They tell you all these stories about people being executed within 60 days of the crime or less, of sleeping judges, of confessions given by torture, etc. They’ll tell you about how jew’s in that country so often beat up on germans for their part in WW2 and about how when a german comes up for a speeding ticket the judge will of course mention the first world war as a reason for his sentence being so severe. If one see’s murder one does not simply call it murder with Chinese characteristics and go about their day. If it’s done to his citizen then he cannot simply stand by if he wants to keep his job as a leader of the free world.
I think the Chinese government where right in executing this man. The “mental-illness” excuse was a poor attempt to disguse his crime…he was clearly in search of a “quick-buck”…not a career as a pop-star as some of the press would have people believe.
If you visit another country you have to respect their laws and customs…if you break those laws and customs you have to expect to be treated accordingly..China executes drug smugglers..hence he was executed.
The U.K. government should have shown some courage and stood behind the Chinese government who were right in their actions.
Ben (a U.K. tourist currently in China)
Dear Tourist, please keep your ignorance to yourself!Shaikh was my neighbour in London and you obviously have no knowledge of him or the overwhelming evidence that he was insane and delusional, provided by people who knew him well. He was not given a fair trial and now it is too late; the strongest argument against the death penalty is ireversible injustices such as this one. You also have no knowledge of the Chinese legal system. I hope you get a taste of Chinese justice one day, I hope they throw you in a gaol without a fair trial or an interpreter, deny you a lawyer, ignore all the evidence and use you to say “Fuck Off” to Britain. And throw away the key. I will be saying serves him right, he should respect the customs and laws of China!
@Simon Brown
Again where is the evidence. You “claim” you are his next door neighbor and you “claim” he was delusional.
Even if you really are his neighbor and you truly think everything this drug dealer said was true about his retardation, let me ask you this. How on earth did a delusional man manage to get his ass into China and also have 4kg of heroin on him? If the parents are making such a big case out of this on the news, how on earth did they let this mentally unstable man leave their “watchful” eyes if he really was getting really unstable just before he was taken in?
Also, answer this for me. The guy had so much heroin on him it could have bought him a fucking mansion and more. Why on earth would drug dealers or people who supposedly “framed” him would be dumb enough to throw away that amount of drug street value just to lock a supposedly retarded man away.
This isn’t about how he should have been treated. It was the story bought forward to the Chinese court. And the Chinese court smelled bullshit coming from every crevice of his body. So China should give special treatment to liars now?
I find this blog article is rather eloquent in defending China’s stance on Akmal incident so I translated it.If you can read Chinese, here is the source: http://blog.ifeng.com/article/3890130.html
And if there is any grammar mistake, pls pardon my lack of proficiency…
WHO KILLED AKMAL?
The first decade of the 21st century is passing into history, in which a sudden conflict broke out between Chinese and British government, which haven’t quarreled for a long time. Because of the large-scale intervention from the British Premier Gordon Brown, the British administration of Diplomacy and international media, this conflict is escalating to a national level. In six month, the British government negotiated with China for 10 times, and Brown per se even pleaded to China regardless his dignity as a premier. To everyone’s surprise, the target of a permanent member in UN Council’s fanfare is a drug dealer: Akmal.
In the morning on September 12th, 2009, the British citizen Akmal Shaikh arrived at Urumuqi International Airport from Dushanbe, Tajikstan with 4 kilograms of heroin, and was caught on site by Chinese custom security. As every one knows, drug-dealing is perceived as a severe crime which causes serious social harm and gets heavily punished all over the world, including Britain. 4 kilograms of heroin is enough to kill 26.8 thousand people! Facing an explicit crime like this, nothing is unsual when China sentenced Akmal to death according to its own law. On a high moral level, China is ridding the world and Britain of harm; on a low one, China is protecting its own people from being harmed by drugs.
However, such a legally and ethically rightful act, a pure crime case, incited a storm in Britain. At first, the Britain embassy in China requested for a psycho-evaluation. According to China’s laws, the materials brought up by Britain is inadquate to prove that Akmal is mentally disturbed, nor any of Akmal’s relatives had a history of mental disease, and the request was naturally turned down .
Then the “desprate” Britains started to use the raicial tactic, emphasising on purpose that Akmal is the first European excuted by China in 50 years. Akmal’s family instead used sympathy tactic: his brother wrote a letter to Fu Ying, the Chinese embassador to Britain, which pleaded that China should show mercy because Akmal’s children will be sad if their father was excuted, he himself sad for losing his sibling, his mother sad and probably get a heart attack. The Britain premier then used his humanitarian tactic to wage one and another soft yet hardened offense. However, China stood its ground and executed the death penalty lawfully, which not only defended its own judicial soverenity but also showed its commitment to prevent Chinese citizens from being harmed by drugs.
Despite that Akmal was executed, a lot of questions still hang aroung in my mind. Why would Britain theater such an all-out rescue for a drug dealer disregarding its dignity and the suspicion of intervening Chinese judiciary soverenity? Why would a mighty permanent member of the UN Council loses face to the world on such a trival incident? Who killed Akmal?
The fact is, if you understand westerners, you would know that Britain government doesn’t want to rescue Akmal at all, and everything is just a show. Poor Akmal is just a sacrifice to the need of political interests. In fact, if Britain government really wants to rescue Akmal, it will be very simple. First, you exchange with your national interest; second, you have to do it behind the stage, not a public fanfare like this.
You want your criminal citizen back but has nothing to exchange? Britain, a country skilled in diplomacy couldn’t be so naive on this point. In 1980s, two French secret agents sinked “Rainbow Warrior”, the flagship of Green Peace organization, then got caught and was sentenced to prison by New Zealand government. To rescue them, France ingloriously used various diplomatic resources even trade measures. If Britains forgets history, think about Lai Changxing, the Chinese criminal hiding in Canada, the ex UK colony.
Second, as a major country skilled in diplomacy, Britain certainly knows about every country has its own different conditions and how to deal with them in different ways. Dealing with a country like China, which puts so much emphasis on “face”, theatring a public fanfare just equals pushing Akmal to the guillotine. Even if China wants to spare him against its own laws, when it gets public, China has no other choice but execution. What’s more, Britain knows well about the history between the two countries. The first war between these two countries were caused by Britain dumping opium to China, after which westerners established extraterritoriality, and China lost its judiciary soverenity. Britain making trouble again over a drug-dealer is definitely an aggressive move to the whole Chinese nation. When this case got public, 99% Chinese netizens supports death penalty. Which government dare to make a concession to foreign countries against such an internal public pressure?
At last, if Britain really doesn’t understand this, it has other rounded ways to Akmal’s rescue. For example, it can declare Akmal’s status as an Britain special agent, and the heroin he carried with is for the need of cracking down drug-trafficking. There are precedent examples of Britain’s “pragmatic diplomacy”. When the corruption scandal erupted in Saudi and Britain arm-sale, the Britain government closed the case in the name of national interest because the scandal was related to Saudi royalties. If Britain still fails to comprehend, look at France. The French Defense Department once refused to publicize its documents in the name of national security, and acquitted all related suspects. Both Britains and French lacks no wisdom in these cases.
Obviously, what the Britain government trully intended was to utilize Akmal’s death rather than rescue him. Gordon the premier could present his people-first image by making China a brutal and ruthless country to rescue his poor poll-survey statistics. What’s more, the racial propaganda by western media could again get China demonized and obstruct it from rising for a while. Akmal, a drug-dealer’s death could bring so much political gain, why not to kill him?
It’s just that our poor Akmal even doesn’t know how he was pushed to the gallows. He even thanked his democratic, humanitarian government and his benevolent premier Gorden Brown before his death.
Of course, somebody worried that executing Akmal will make an impact on Sino-Britain relationship because Britain is rather “angry” and “condemned China in strongest terms”. This anger is real, yet it’s still a show. We could make it clear that, the Sino-Britain relationship won’t be affected at all–why would Britain cut its relationship with China over a drug-dealer it doesn’t give a damn? Judging by Britain’s wisdom and national power, in two year’s time, it could rescue Akmal for ten times. I’m even suspecting that, when China waited for two years to execute Akmal, it was indeed waiting for Brtain’s bargain.
I can’t be bothered to read the rest as it’s probably the same histrionic claptrap that I have had to put up with for too long. But:
1. 2009? So was it two months or two years?
2. The last sentence. You mean your country was using someone’s life to bargain for a better deal on the import of MP3 players or what?
Sorry I did actually start reading it because I have nothing better to do and I came across the following enjoyable gambits:
3. Don’t kid yourself, Canada is its own place. We don’t want anything to do with those blackguards. (PS. How did Lai Changxing become such an enemy of the state, if it wasn’t building up a great sub-economy through his ‘relationships’ with officials and falling foul of them when he didn’t slip them enough under the table)
4. You use this diatribe as a comeback. How long will it take you to realise that inward-looking, opionated pieces do not do any favours for your cause?
5. This ‘enough to kill 26.8 thousand people’ claptrap. This is based on what exactly? Did you mean ’supply’ or kill? If it’s the latter, what size of person and what level of addiction would achieve this?
One moron died BIG DEAL!!!
Brit f**k heads LEARN from this
1. Keep your lunatic neighbor, father, relative, friend AT YOUR WATCH!!!! or they will go chase their wild dream of becoming a POP STAR while he is a popping 53!!!! fucking old dude
2.Check the case someone gave you. Even if you are an idiot. Now you know that you are if you haven’t thought about it.
3. Get yourself a better excuse next time. Chinese do NOT give a shit to lunatics. One less moron or drug dealer on earth is better for the human race.
4. It is the Ching’s FREEDOM OF FUCKING SPEECH to fuck Gordon Brown and you!! at the international broadcast and to ask you to shut the fuck up. Don’t understand this? TAKE A LOGIC CLASS!!!!
Who’s “freedom of speech”?
If the guy had actually been mentally ill and had been completely unaware of what he was doing. Would you still think that the guy should be executed?
Why exactly should “human rights” apply to Pakis? If they’re not blowing up British buses and girls schools, they’re smuggling smack and fucking their cousins.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/4442010.stm
“It is estimated that at least 55% of British Pakistanis are married to first cousins”
“British Pakistanis are 13 times more likely to have children with genetic disorders than the general population – they account for just over 3% of all births but have just under a third of all British children with such illnesses. “
You stole the words right from my mouth. Why the hell should we care that some would be terrorist is going to be killed. Americans are more concerned about alley cats, for crying out loud.
People try to save drug dealer? Have they eat wrong medicine? They do know drug dealer is bad guy?
This is both amusing and sad. I haven’t been back for a while but I have a few points:
1. Chinese ‘tourists’ who have happened to wander upon this place and want to make a point. Your failure to grasp basic grammar gives you right away (despite your protestations). Yes I know you’ve been programmed, but you have to understand, if we’re here, we LIKE China, we RESPECT China. It’s you guys who have a chip on your shoulder (or a chipolata in your..) that bring it down
2. There are people like the fella above who have clearly gone native and are bringing their Texan law into an argument where it is not relevant
3. I actually think the ‘retardation’ (as you so eloquently put it) angle was a load of codswallop and the last refuge of a damned man (although I also believe that needs must)
4. When you go to a country you must respect the laws of that place. Also, live by the sword, die by the sword.
5. My issue is not with the death sentence (although this is intrinsically flawed and a true indicator of a not fully developed country)
6. The reason I was so riled was because you puppets got so riled by our leader actually expressing an opinion for one of our ‘citizens’ (even though I am of the opinion that he wasn’t really). I would equally respect the opinions of your ‘Who’ and ‘When’ if one of your ‘citizens’ had been so barbarically treated in a foreign country
Texan law? What? They throw the drug dealers in jail here.
Sorry Jones. I hold my hands up that I was using Chinese-style pistrionic misunderstanding to further my point. I have nothing against Texas and I misused an example there. It was directed to a guy above (that I can’t find now) who seemed very gung-ho towards the death penalty and easier due to the fact that the guy had brown skin.
Apology offered..
Learn to forgive and forget..
though it’s not easy to be a Christian
in such a scary world where not only goverments
can’t forgive but ordinary people too!
sad..pray always!
hammar
then if this is the case . all chinese drug smugglers should also die! a lot of chinese drug lords in the Philippines only get 10 years for selling coc for more than 10 years in their lives they should execute all chinese people in other countries who sold drugs and smuggled coc or marijuana all chinese mother smugglers these mother fukkers gotta die too!!! i mean.. the government doesnt have the right to kill someone or take a life only god has! god is not the government ,. REMEMBER THIS!!! THE GOVERNMENT IS NOT GOD!!! fukk all governments giving death sentences to drug smugglers!!! fukk em!
and 1 more thing this british person probably has a kid waiting for him to come back home.. or maybe a wife or his family!! fukk the chinese government! who the fukk gave them the right to kill a smuggler fukk em! i hope who ever jury or judge decides to execute a smuggler that their families suffer and they all die just like this british person only trying to make money for his family!!!!!