The Diaoyu Islands owner identified

FW: 釣魚島的島主出現了！請速多轉發！(The Diaoyu Islands owner identified)

Thanks, Selwyn, for the article. However, it shows only a record of recent history. In fact,

documentation of Chinese sovereignty over these islands go back even further. Below is

an extract from Wikipedia:  TheDiaoyu Islands - China Wiki –The free encyclopedia on China ...

Whatever the case, the rest of the world is aware of all the ulterior motives behind all these

wrangling and machinations...to contain the awakened dragon!
Regards

Bob

Historical background:
China's earliest record of the Diaoyu Islands can be traced back to the Sui Dynasty, more than 1,000 years ago. At the time, China's Taiwan and the Diaoyu Islands were close to another independent state called Ryukyu (琉球国). And Emperor Yang of the Sui Dynasty (隋炀帝) sent Zhu Kuan (朱宽) as a special emissary to win it over and demand it pledge allegiance to the Sui Court. In the 14th century, Emperor Taizu of the Ming Dynasty (明太祖) was known far and wide for his military prowess. Thus, the King of Ryukyu started to pay tribute to the imperial court officially and Ryukyu became a vassal state of the Ming Dynasty.

The Diaoyu Islands (钓鱼岛)

In 1372, a Chinese named Yang Zai (杨载) landed on the Diaoyu Islands for the first time. There was a detailed record about Diaoyu Islands in the book Sail with the Wind (顺风相送) , a navigational guidebook, which was published during the reign of Emperor Yongle (永乐) of the Ming Dynasty. During that period, people of the Ming Dynasty collected pearls and medicinal ingredients and fished around the Diaoyu Islands under the jurisdiction of Taiwan. This was also clearly recorded in Reports on the Mission to Ryukyu (使琉球录), a book written by Chen Kan (陈侃) in the 11th year of the reign of Emperor Jiaqing (嘉庆) of the Ming Dynasty. In the middle of the Ming Dynasty, some national heroes, such as General Qi Jiguang (戚继光), used the Diaoyu Islands as the strategic line of defense, when they fought against Japanese pirates. In 1602, Japan invaded Ryukyu. From then on, Ryukyu's internal affairs were under the supervision of the Japanese for over 40 years. In 1654, Emperor Kangxi of Qing Dynasty (清康熙帝) bestowed on the King of Ryukyu the title of King Shangzhi (尚质王). Ryukyu was obliged to pay tribute to the imperial court every two years, regarding China as "the Father State" and assuming the reign title of Qing Dynasty. Many maps and nautical charts of the Ming and Qing dynasties clearly marked Diaoyu Islands as part of China's territory.

 

---

Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2013 10:27:56 +0800
Subject: 釣魚島的島主出現了！請速多轉發！(The Diaoyu Islands owner identified)

釣魚島的島主出現了 (The Diaoyu Islands owner identified)

 The document  ""  it says ShengXH had obtained some herbs from the Diaoyu Island and effectively cured Empress Dowager and many other folks. As a commendation of his good deeds, the Empress issued a decree to allow him to continue to use the island to further develop the herbs.  ""

釣魚島的島主出現了(The Diaoyu Islands owner identified)

The real Diaoyu Islands' owner identified。。

With evidence of Empress Dowager Commandment, the Diaoyu Islands' owner identified.

Diaoyu Islands was bestowed to Sheng Xuanhuai of Jiangsu Province of Qing Empire by Commandment.

Please circulate immediately....

釣魚島的島主出現了！

真正的釣魚島島主找到了，有慈禧皇太后的諭旨為證

釣魚島的島主出現了是大清國的江蘇武進人士盛宣懷

 

皇太后慈諭 

太常寺正卿盛宣懷所進藥丸甚有效驗  據奏原料藥材采自臺灣海外釣魚臺小島   靈藥產於海上  功效殊乎中土  知悉該卿家世設藥局  施診給藥  救濟貧病  殊甚嘉許  即將該釣魚臺 黃尾嶼 赤嶼三小島賞給盛宣懷為產業  供采藥之用 其深體皇太后及皇上仁德普被之至意  欽此

光緒十九年十月

（盛宣懷所進皇太后藥丸，原料藥材來自釣魚島，由盛宣懷的天津廣仁堂制）

Prudent car ownership measures

The strong hand of the Govt to introduce prudent thinking among the people in buying cars is a welcome move. The prices of cars have gone way above the means of the people, and so are housing prices and the prices of many luxury items. The new culture of buy first and pay later is creating a nation of debtors. And the biggest culprit towards making people all tied up in debt is housing.

What is so bad about taking a $100k loan to be repayable in 10 years compares to a $500k or $1m loan repayable in 30 years?  I can’t tell the difference except one is of a bigger amount, repayable over a longer period, and also with a longer life span.

Would the Govt also apply the same principle to the housing market to encourage prudence in home buying? How about 50% out front for the buying of a property and repayable in 15 years?  Or it is ok to be less prudent in home buying but not so in car buying?

Khaw Boon Wan, wow, is it real?

The announcement by Boon Wan on the back to basics public housing policy is a move in the right direction and will be most welcomed by the people. The objectives of public housing have been altered through the years by shallow thinking people that have forgotten why it was called public housing in the first place that it is best forgotten. Let’s get the basics right.

Public housing is for the citizens, the majority of whom that needs a roof over their heads, a place to rest and bring up children, a place to go home to. When getting a place to sleep is getting so expensive, it is going to make life very difficult to many people as not everyone is so bless to have so much money to pay for housing.

Boon Wan is calling for more feedbacks given the complexities of housing as a home, as an asset, as a fall back to be liquidated to release some funds for retirement, and a host of other purposes. What I would suggest is to go back to basics and simplicity. The priority is to make housing affordable, I mean really and reasonably affordable to the average citizens, and make the right to ownership simple. Some rules are still necessary but need not be so exclusive and demanding.

First principle, all Singaporeans must be allowed to buy a public flat. Everyone needs a place to stay, especially when you are a citizen.

Second principle, build to ensure the supply is enough to meet the demand and not like those thoughtless people who created the demand supply problem that led to the big angst among the people and a property bubble.

Third principle, provide a buffet spread and let the people decide what they want or can afford to buy. Let the people make their own choice and not dictate the choice on the people.

Fourth principle, when supply is adequate to meet demand, there is no need for all the exclusivity clauses to give impression that the higher income buyers are depriving the lower income earners of their chances. This wicked divisive idea to pitch the people against one another must be removed. Every citizen, regardless of income level, is entitled to buy his public flat within a simpler framework of rules and regulations.

Fifth principle, PRs are not eligible to buy public housing. However, they can rent from the citizens or HDB can build rental flats for them. PRs can go to the private property market if they can afford it. But to prevent a big bubble in private property prices, foreigners, including PRs, can only buy to stay and not for speculation. Given the limited space available, it is necessary to have sound regulations to prevent non citizens from churning the property market to raise the cost of living here. Many of the restrictions on foreign ownership of properties should stay and more be introduced to keep the property market under control.

Sixth principle, the speculative element in public housing should be minimised. When there is adequate supply, public housing prices should be stable.

But, as they all said, how real is Boon Wan and his return to basics? Wait for the fine prints. Hopefully cheaper public housing would not compromise on the size and quality of the flats. Please, no reduction in the lease period or things like can see back to HDB or any profits must return to HDB.

Julia Gillard: We will support your job and put Aussie workers first

‘We will support your job and put Aussie workers first…I don’t want to hear stories of Australians missing out on a job because a 457 visa has been misused.’ Julia Gillard, PM Australia.

This is the kind of commitment by a PM and Govt to its citizens. It is always citizens first. And the Australian workers union leaders are pressuring the Govt to stop the exploitation by foreigners to work in Australia at the expense of Australians.

Compare these to the situation here? What is the position of the Govt and the Union and also the Singaporeans affected, losing their jobs to foreigners?

The new Singaporean Aspiration

‘nslan:

March 8, 2013 at 12:55 am (Quote)

Does anybody know the worth of a Degree in Singapore?

A Degree in Arts or Science or Infocom from the “Prestigous” Local NUS and NTU >>> Congratulation! You are entitled to compete with your local fellows for a call-centre job starting from $2k+++ with experience.

Any Degree from Phxxxx or Inxxx >>> Congratulation!!! Well done!!! Come work as a drafter or designer or even a document controller and we will pay you $4-6k to start with and more with experience!’

The above is a quote from a blogger in TRE. Some were lamenting that many bankers and managers were replaced by foreign PMETs and ended up driving taxis. There is a kind of changing of guards in our local institutions including GLCs where the locals are rapidly being replaced by questionable foreigners. This is exactly the same as Singaporeans being eased or forced out of the island to seek greener pasture overseas. And the pace will only quicken with the proposals in the Population White Paper.

At the rate things are going, the new aspiration of young Singaporeans is to get a degree from one of the world class local universities by spending a small fortune for it, get a temporary job or a low paying job and work for a few years before becoming self employed as a taxi driver, driving foreign workers and foreign maids around, and helping them with their luggages and hoping for a good tip. But at the same time be prepared for a few lashing when the service provided is not up to the customer’s satisfaction.

Great aspiration indeed. And the foreign PMETs will be filling up all the cushy jobs in the private sector, GLCs, stats boards and even ministries. A great and bright future awaiting our young Singaporeans.

The budget debate

The debate on the budget exposes many current problems, high cost of living, high property prices, high COE and car prices, congestion in public transport, foreigners taking over Singaporean jobs, Singaporeans being discriminated or victimized in Singapore by foreigners, low wage for workers, NS for PRs etc etc. These problems have been simmering for so many years without a real solution. And Parliament is grabbling with these problems in a most make belief way with MPs offering piece meal solutions that are often comical and good for a laugh.

Do they really did not know what the shit is causing all these problems? Want the answer? Influx of foreigners! KNN the answer is there for all to see and no one is able to see it. Without knowing what is the cause of the problem how are they able to solve the problem at the heart? It is all because of the huge foreigner population.

Now you see the cause, the solution should be must clearer and easier to deal with, right or wrong? Did someone say we should increase the population to 6.9m to solve our problems? Unbelieveable, really unbelieveable! But, but according to a professor, increasing the population is a solution to all our problems and will also lead to more growth and better infrastructure and better quality of living. If this is true, also advocated in the White Paper, just bring in the foreigners and the problems will go away.

Another view, all the problems today are caused by high and compressed population growth of foreigners and having more people here will only add to the problems. Agree or not?

Would many of these problems be solved if the number of foreigners be curbed, the population size be limited? Sure, resetting the population a decade back will cause another host of problems. From obesity to a lean body will need a lot of adjustments and the throwing away of a wardrobe of oversize clothing. The problems today are self inflicted and going forward or backward will bring with it more problems. Which way will solve or cause more problems?

What do you think?

Now there is another more serious problem. The blind are trying so hard to see but cannot see, or is it a case of have eyes but cannot see. Heard of downsizing the population?

Japan continues to provoke China

Japan again arrested a Chinese fishing boat for illegal fishing 210km off Diaoyutai/Senkaku Islands. If I am not mistaken, the economic zone of a country is 200km from its coast. In this case, the boat is in a disputed area claimed by both countries.

This kind of provocations has been going on for years. China can no longer sit still when it claims that Diaoyutai Islands belong to her. The Chinese fishing boat was thus inside Chinese territory. China would have to act or lose its credibility in claiming the Islands.

China may hold back from firmer action as this act could be an intended one to provoke China to act. And the Japanese would then escalate the conflict to drag in the Americans. Or it could be a plot by both the Americans and the Japanese to push China over the edge and then to tell the world that China is an aggressive and belligerent country that is willing to resort to use force to settle territorial dispute.

China may do a similar act by arresting some Japanese ship on a tit for tat. Perhaps arresting a Japanese Coast Guard vessel would up the ante and see how far the Japanese and the Americans are prepared to go.