TED Conversations

Jaden Ye

This conversation is closed.

Are westerners biased in defining a terrorist act

It seems that any atrocity on innocent people on the west countries' ground is authentic terrorism, while it occurs in countries like China,apathy and schadenfreude appear in the western media,,instead of sympathy and unity. They intentionally turn a black eye on the victims,seem to justify the act as decent rant.
Why some westerners are this cold? Respect should be payed to the innocent victims,not negligence.Recent terrorist act in Beijing completely reveals some people's double-standards and hypocrisy. The reports on CNN really squeezed my heart,

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/11/01/world/asia/china-beijing-tiananmen/index.html

why could not us all united, west and east, African and Asian,Christian and Muslim,etc,that is the way it should be.

Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Nov 11 2013: To be completely honest, I find it to be in both our best interests for me to digress from maintaining the aforementioned sentiment in our conversation. I make no apologies for the following, while acknowledging the unfortunate circumstances through which DICTATE the premise that underlies your inaccurate responses.

    The meticulous undertaking required in addressing the falsehoods that are found unnervingly consistent throughout the entirety of your response are overwhelmingly demanding. Nor do I believe it would be appropriate for me to do so, for my intentions behind participation on TED aim to promote constructive interactions.

    With regards to the purpose of this talk, any support or justifying of terrorist acts in media only undermines the integrity in journalism and serves to only further distract from acknowledging the heinous nature of said events. The dynamics present with regards to the relationship between the Chinese government and the Uyghurs are disheartening to say the least. Upon any relatively extensive review, it's rather apparent that neither party maintains any order of operations or forms of disposition that are conducive towards civility.

    "Actually the censorship does not block us from seeing the truth,we still have access to see the world,to listen to the views, even the views completely on the opposite of the government."

    This bold-faced lie and brazen claim alone should constitute the termination of your membership and participation on TED. That's certainly an idea worth spreading, especially to consider the ease of access of those in the western world to the facts, not just opinions that directly contradict your claims.
    • thumb
      Nov 15 2013: I admire your straightforwardness,and encourage.The interactions being carried out are what I wanted to hear,and conducive to the reduction of misunderstanding. With regard to your comments,I totally agree with your the third paragraph of your comments.

      Your perception of the authenticity of my words is based on groundless source,I dont know how your come to this conclusion. At least,I live in China,I know China better than you. ' the premise that underlies your inaccurate responses',to what extent are my responses being inaccurate,and what are the accurate info if my words are inaccurate.

      Now,I am responding to your comments under the tightly implemented firm wall,I could access to CNN,BBC,even White House websites. Your false-accusation and insults to my explanation of my true conditions are disrespects to your education and wide-ranged info you received. You dont even know you need a proof to disapprove one's statement,you are hysterical because you dont know how to debate with true knowledge or firsthand experience.

      I would like to discuss with you with respect and based on verified info,not just naive assumptions or manipulated info.
      • Nov 16 2013: "Other news organizations have come under similar pressure. The websites of The New York Times, including a new Chinese-language edition, were blocked when it published an article in October 2012 on the family wealth of Wen Jiabao, then the prime minister. Like Bloomberg, The Times has also not received residency visas for new journalists. "

        http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/09/world/asia/bloomberg-news-is-said-to-curb-articles-that-might-anger-china.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1

        Read entire article for further understanding as to the censorship. Just because you can access sites, doesn't mean that you have the ability to view all of the content. I'm astounded that you continue to beat the drum on this one, when it's no secret to the rest of the world.

        " We Chinese dont believe in any religion"
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholicism_in_China
        Again, wrong....

        "The number of dissents and protesters is acceptable, no government could guarantee its people 100% satisfied,even in the US, protests exist,Occupying Wallstreet is a case."

        Acceptable to suppress... ?

        China To Close Notorious Re-Education Through Labor Camps | TIME.com http://world.time.com/2013/11/16/china-to-close-notorious-re-education-through-labor-camps/#ixzz2knfnlrli
        Step in the right direction...

        "You dont even know you need a proof to disapprove one's statement,you are hysterical because you dont know how to debate with true knowledge or firsthand experience."
        The proof is readily available, seek and you shall find...

        I hope the best for you and all those living in China.
        • thumb
          Nov 18 2013: Glad to continue our conversation. I enjoyed the exchange of ideas. Actually,I've read all the articles you shared above.I got what you are trying to indicate.

          The truth is I cant be convinced merely by reading those articles. I have developed a mentality that no info reported by media is an absolute true,namely, I am skeptical to the stories reported by media,I think most of people are. Therefore,your evidences borrowed from unstable sources,are feeble in upholding your stance.

          May I ask you a question respectfully,can you read Chinese articles,or have you ever read the stories you showed in their Mandarin version? If not,I have to say you are not that persuasive in arguing to me,because it's obvious the more extensive your perspectives of seeing a issue,the closer you are to truth. That's your disadvantage,because if you read the cases above in their Chinese version,even in a widely deemed free and neutral media place,HongKong,the causes and consequences are totally different.

          I have to say you are an expert in the study of contemporary China at least,I respect all those.The events and status quo you introduced about China are very much relevant to every single one of us.

          There is no escape that Chinese government has done a lot of suppression,and things that dont apply to the western values.I've never tried,and will not try to deny and cover faults of Chinese government,because that goes counter to my own judgement and value.

          My purpose of posting this conversation and my contentions are:
          1.We all need to be open-minded,and level-minded,not to be misled by any government or media.
          2.No act of attacking innocent tourists is justifiable,justifying it will not benefit any of us,but to deepen our misunderstandings.
          3.CNN's negligence and apathy is not acceptable,,no matter you have every reason to track down the deep causes of the terrorist attack,compassion and respects should be payed to the dead and injured.
          3.Any straightforward thoughts are welcomed.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.