The Knifing People Know-how of Mao's fall on the Head of  Ling Chai

_____On Yvonne Abraham's "Beijing lesson unlearned"(Boston Globe, Globe Columnist / June 7, 2009)

By Yin Chin

China's late dictator Mao Ze-dong left a very precious spiritual legacy to the Chinese people ____ “knifing people”.

Please forgive my ignorance, I have always thought that only Chinese people have inherited the legacy, and that only Carma Hinton of the Long bow Film Company who was sunbathed by Mao Zedong Thought, has inherited the legacy. But when I accidentally read, Yvonne Abraham "Beijing lesson unlearned", I found that the spiritual legacy of Mao’s has also inherited by somebody from USA's.

In the article, Yvonne Abraham puts firstly a big political label on the Head of Ling Chai: Ling Chai "put the boot into a pillar of democracy right here in Boston."

What terribleness!

Ling Chai, a Chinese weak woman how to "put the boot into a pillar of democracy right here in Boston"

 ____she sued the filmmakers, both Carma Hinton and Richard Gordon of the Long Bow Film Company for defamation.

In a democratic country, people settle a dispute through legal means; this is the most normal way.  Why did Yvonne Abraham have an ordinary civil disputes raised to a terrible political height?

In Mao Ze-dong's “knifing people” legacy, this method is called: limitless high plane of principle.

A trivia or a trivial remark, it can be rose to a terrible political height, and then let everybody forget the original trivia or the original trivial remark. Everybody  is paying a good deal of attention to the label of the terrible political height. You have to spend a lot of time to explain it, but no matter what you how to interpret all of no avail, because the label of the terrible political height had nothing to do with you, and so it goes where you knifed down. 

China's late dictator Mao Zedong likes to use such a vicious know-how to knife down his political opponents one after another. Both China's late defense minister Peng De-huai and the late state president Liu Shao-qi were just thus and so. More than 30 years ago this method was very popular in China. Now the Chinese people despise anyone who uses this method, but the Long bow Film Company is dealing with Ling Chai with this method.

I do not know where and to whom Yvonne Abraham learned the method from.

Ling Chai and Long bow Film Company’s dispute is originally very simple.

Ling Chai thinks, the Long bow Film Company in the documentary " The Gate of Heavenly Peace ", makes her two times dialogues montage together from different times and different places, and in the middle deletion of a 40-minute dialogue. It has distorted Ling Chai original meaning, and the Long bow Film Company has the words "qi-dai" to the bloodshed," translated into "Hope" to the bloodshed, it has caused serious misunderstanding to Ling Chai and 1989 pro-democracy movement in China.

I think, if the Long bow film company is a serious and responsible scholars and producers, they can open fairly the 40-minute dialogue recording. Let everybody, also including me know clear, although the dialogue recording has been montaged, and in the middle deletion of a 40-minute dialogue. But it does not distort the original meaning of Ling Chai. As for the "qi-dai” for bloodshed, translated into "hoping” for the bloodshed, language experts can be invited to make a fair appraisal, so reasonable and what reason must Ling Chai take legal action?

Now we can see that Long bow Film Company departed from the rudimentary academic ethics to ignore the Ling Chai complaint, instead, on their website they carried the negative news of Ling Chai's company which does not have any relation to their case.

Why did they do so?

The judges and people of the United States  can not understand how evil their behavior is.

The Long bow Film Company is very familiar with China's national conditions, once people know this is Ling Chai's company, nobody dare to have any business affairs with her company because all the traders fear about the Chinese political problems. Just because of it, Ling Chai had to seek legal means to settle the dispute.

Since the Long bow Film Company is unwilling to resolve the dispute through negotiations, they ought to wait for a final decision from the court. But just during the waiting for the court's decision, the long bow film company propagated with a pitiful appearance everywhere that they would be accused of going bankrupt by Ling Chai. Since the long bow film company would go bankrupt, they should seek donations for the case, but the long bow film company called for a signature_____

Ling Chai “using its money and its power to stifle debate and suppress the historical record is cause for concern."

Does Chai Ling has any power in USA?

How does she use her money and its power to stifle the debate and suppress to the historical record?

Anyone can think:

This is not defamation?!

This is not a rascal?!

Because the Long bow Film Company use perfectly the knifing people know-how of Mao's, now everybody concerned about the political height ____ Ling Chai "put the boot into a pillar of democracy right here in Boston." As a documentary,nobody concerned about whether the Long bow Film Company has distorted Ling Chai's original meaning, As a scholar, nobody concerned about whether the Long bow Film Company has the responsibility to verify Ling Chai’s complaint and as a citizen,nobody concerned about whether Ling Chai has the right to settle disputes through legal means.

In her article,Yvonne Abraham, never mentioned a word about those evil action of the Long bow Film Company, she also avoided talking about the moral responsibility and academic responsibility the Long bow Film company should bear,she only blames Ling Chai.

Yes, the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment protection of the right that people speak and cite the words of others people, but it does not protect the right that fabricate Ling Chai's words with technical means!

I hope to know, as a writer, what Yvonne Abraham's  moral quality is.

Why doesn't Yvonne Abraham think?

Ling Chai dares to stand up to the court ,which explains clearly that she has done nothing to be ashamed of!

The long bow film company did not dare to open it to delete the 40-minutes dialogue, this also explains clearly that they have done something to be ashamed of!

We have seen a fact:

Now not Ling Chai "use the legal system of the United States" to deprive longbow film freedom of speech, academic freedom, but the Longbow Film Company "use the legal system of the United States" cover up their moral responsibilities and academic responsibilities.

Now not Ling Chai "put the boot into a pillar of democracy right here in Boston", but the Longbow Film Company makes the "pillar of democracy" as a butcher's knife to pursue Ling Chai everywhere with somebody who inherited the knifing people legacy of Mao's.

Now I am not worried about whether the Long bow film company will go bankrupt, because their moral quality has gone bankrupt!

Yin Chin in Stockholm 2009-07-05