rec.sport.tennis@googlegroups.com
Google Groups
Unsure why you received this message? You previously subscribed to digests from this group, but we haven't been sending them for a while. We fixed that, but if you don't want to get these messages, send an email to rec.sport.tennis+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
Topic digest
View all topics
NOW WILL YOU ALL AGREE FED *IS* AT PEAK!!! - 2 Updates
Sibel Edmonds - The Lone Gladio - 1 Update
I'm a Racist! - 1 Update
Sampras Federer Nadal - 4 Updates
Fantastic Federer - 2 Updates
So apparently, Nadal has appendicitis but he has decided to play on in Shanghai! - 3 Updates
Federer hired a fit trainer - 1 Update
FLIPPIN HECK! incredible play from Djoker and Ferrer - 5 Updates
NPR: Hong Kong, a former British colony is wealthy, cosmopolitan, ... more like New York than Beijing. It enjoys far more freedoms than the mainland, including free speech and an open Internet - 1 Update
Since Obama has proven himself a lawless president... he says let's Import Gitmo Terrorists to the United States - 1 Update
Federer's Twlight - 3 Updates
NOW WILL YOU ALL AGREE FED *IS* AT PEAK!!!
TennisGuy <Jeffery142@hotmail.com>: Oct 11 12:40PM -0400
On 10/11/2014 11:09 AM, The Iceberg wrote:
> So Fed takes out Djoker 64 64 in Shanghai - yet more proof he is AT PEAK!
> Yet Court1 and co call me a troll and John Liang says my tennis opinions can't be trusted. WTF has to happen for you Fedfans to accept that I've proved it and I right?!!
Sometimes I really wonder about you Icey.
You need to clean out the cobwebs in your brain.
First you need to get out your trusty dictionary and look up some words.
How about starting with "PEAK"?
Peak means the highest, best level of play by a player in their career.
Just because Federer beats Djoker, Murray, or even Nadal now, does NOT
mean he is at peak.
It just means that he beat them today.
Just as when he beat Nadal early in his career, he just beat him. It did
not signify that he was at his peak.
In other words his level of play today or way back before his peak was
GOOD ENOUGH to do the job.
GOOD ENOUGH to do the job does NOT equal PEAK!!!
Capiche?
--
"I don't decide what's important, I merely reflect it." - Whisper
"Better polish that turd...errr mirror, because nothing important has
come our way yet." - TennisGuy
TennisGuy <Jeffery142@hotmail.com>: Oct 11 02:06PM -0400
On 10/11/2014 1:18 PM, The Iceberg wrote:
> so how far off 'peak' is he then, you know, from this mythical peak
> time you Fedfans claim existed a long time previously?
Now _that is a reasonable question to ask.
If I go back and watch videos of Fed playing at his peak, circa
2004-2009, I clearly see a player who is much quicker in all aspects of
his game than he is in 2014.
I see a player who is much more nimble in body movements than he is in 2014.
I see a player whose shots have more zip to them overall, than in 2014.
I see a player who was much more consistent in his shots than in 2014.
I see a player who had much more stamina to his game than in 2014.
etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.
How far off peak is he you ask?
Very far off peak.
As a matter of fact, no matter how hard he tries, nor what his workout
regimen will be going forward, he will never get even close to peak
again. C'est la vie.
Does that mean he can't win another slam? **** N O ***
--
"I don't decide what's important, I merely reflect it." - Whisper
"Better polish that turd...errr mirror, because nothing important has
come our way yet." - TennisGuy
Back to top
Sibel Edmonds - The Lone Gladio
TennisGuy <Jeffery142@hotmail.com>: Oct 11 12:52PM -0400
On 10/10/2014 5:56 PM, Scott wrote:
> Read your fourth paragraph. That's LIHOP
Here's the fourth paragraph:
"What she discovered was truly shocking. She tried to alert all levels
of the U.S. government of CIA/FBI/Pentagon involvement in 9/11 and was
gagged every step of the way."
Trying to alert all levels of government about what some individuals at
various levels of government did re: 9/11 is not LIHOP.
Besides, that is what she did in the early 2000's.
Today she is a much smarter, savvier woman.
She knows it was MIHOP.
And her latest book "The Lone Gladio" makes that *abundantly* clear.
--
"I don't decide what's important, I merely reflect it." - Whisper
"Better polish that turd...errr mirror, because nothing important has
come our way yet." - TennisGuy
Back to top
I'm a Racist!
Fednatic <fednatic@gmail.com>: Oct 11 11:36PM +0800
I'm a Racist!
Camilo Andrade 09/15/2014
I'm a racist! I wanted to go ahead and get that out-of-the-way right
away, because I am about to talk about an issue that frequently has me
labeled a racist – immediately – before any conversation even begins.
The online Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines "Racism" as such:
: poor treatment of or violence against people because of their race
: the belief that some races of people are better than others
I'm not sure where Merriam-Webster gets their information from, but
that definition above has not defined racism in America for at least
six years, since Barack Hussein Obama was elected and appointed Eric
Holder as his Attorneys General.
While there seems to be a great deal of confusion in regard to what
defines a racist today, under the Obama regime, there do seem to be
certain beliefs held by those who have become the modern face of
racism in America. The following c??r ?Y en ? ould be used as a
guide of sorts for those who may be uncertain:
Anyone who opposes ANY policy of Barack Hussein Obama, IS a RACIST!
Anyone who questions the intentions of Barack Hussein Obama, IS a
RACIST!
Anyone who suspects, or implies corruption exist within the
administration of Barack Hussein Obama, IS a RACIST!
Anyone who so much as suggest, or implies that Barrack Hussein Obama
has lied about anything, IS a RACIST!
Anyone who believes the federal "SNAP" Food Stamp programs is being
abused, IS a RACIST!
Anyone who believes any form of public assistance is being abused, IS
a RACIST!
Anyone in favor of mandatory drug screening of those on public
assistance, IS a RACIST!
Anyone in favor if those on public assistance performing volunteer
work in their community,??r ?Y en ? IS a RACIST!
Anyone who opposes the expansion of any so-called "entitlement"
program, IS a RACIST!
Anyone who advocates personal responsibility, IS a RACIST!
Anyone critical of Radical Islam, IS a Racist!
Anyone who believes in American Supremacy, IS a RACIST!
Anyone who believes the IRS unjustly targeted Conservative Tax Exempt
Organizations, IS a RACIST!
Anyone who encourages hard work and personal independence, IS a
RACIST!
Anyone who does not believe white cops live to kill black thugs, IS a
RACIST!
Anyone who is not a card-carrying member of the Democratic Party, IS a
RACIST!
Anyone who believes we should secure our bo??r ?Y en ? rders, IS a
RACIST!
The above is by no means a complete list of things that make a racist,
but it covers a good deal of those things that will have you labeled
as such today. And please, don't even consider trying to make the
argument that you are not a racist, that makes you a racist!
While the situation lends itself to a lot of opportunity for jokes and
a good laugh, it really is quite sad. While I never believed Obama was
a good candidate for the job and never voted for him, for reasons
which had nothing to do with race, I have to admit that when he was
elected, I was really happy for those who had endured the era of
segregation and fought through the Civil Rights era for equality for
all American's. How great I thought that they had the opportunity to
see a black man elected, by the American people, as the President of
this great nation. For those who are old enough to remember that
shameful part of American history, it had to have meant so much to
them to see that we have evolved to the point where a black man was
elected. What a shame that he has been such a disappointment to them!
He has not just been a disappointment politically and a failure policy
wise, he has been a disappointment socially and set race relations in
this nation back decades! I am seeing things written and hearing
comments from people that I have not heard uttered in decades. Instead
of using his great fortune and position to bring people closer
together, he has used it to divide the people of America along every
political and racial divide he can. In fact, he is often referred to
as the "Great Divider" or "Divider-in-Chief."
I was particularly disappointed when refused to attend the 150th
Anniversary of the Gettysburg Address. What an incredible symbolic
moment in histo??r ?Y en ? ry he had the opportunity to take
advantage of, yet he dismissed it and passed on the opportunity to
carry on with his "routine" daily schedule.
Whatever the motivation of Barrack Hussein Obama, one can make a very
strong argument that he has made decision after decision that has been
to the detriment of America. I am not a fan of conspiracy theories,
but one can easily articulate facts that demonstrate he does not have
the interest of any American's best interest. The only person that
appears to have benefited from his six years to date in office, is
Barrack Hussein Obama and his family. There appear to be some others
who have financially benefited, but the past six years has been all
about him and his family, close family! And in spite of what many may
believe, the ones to have least benefited are the African-American
community. He can tell the public he is an advocate for the poor and
middle class all he wants, but the facts just do not support his
claims. In fact, he has hurt them the most.
Frankly, I'm tired of all this racist BS! It's long past time for ALL
American's to put it behind us! There is no benefit to any of us as a
nation to hang on to any type of prejudice! We ALL bleed red, we all
dream, we all laugh, cry, love, hate, etc.,… The color of our skin has
no bearing on anything! To believe it does is nothing but raw
ignorance!
Thirteen percent of America's population is African-American, yet
America elected a black president, twice. I'd say that's a pretty
powerful indicator we have made some significant advances… It's time
we quit listing to anyone that advocates racism and continue to move
forward as American's… Not African-American's, not Asian, American's,
not Hispanic-American's,??r ?Y en ? but AMERICAN's!!!
Are you tired of all this racist talk?
Back to top
Sampras Federer Nadal
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Oct 11 06:14PM +1100
On 11/10/2014 3:27 AM, TT wrote:
> I don't think this stat is important... and I don't even think that
> Rafa's 10 years in a row is something extraordinary.
I think it's a significant stat. Winning 1 slam makes your year a
success by any measure. Doing it 10 years, & in Rafa's case every
single year since 'launch', does speak to the quality of the player.
Rafa has had a great year every year, & it's going on a decade. That's
pretty remarkable. There isn't a year you could say was a failure for him.
Sampras went slamless 1991, 1992 & 2001. Federer 2011, 2013 & 2014.
Rafa has no bad years at all, despite skipping AO, USO & Wimbledon a few
times.
TT <ascii@dprk.kp>: Oct 11 02:35PM +0300
11.10.2014 0:55, John Liang kirjoitti:
> He is five years older than the young guns
27 vs 22/21 is not disadvantage. If you're a late bloomer but are done
at 27 that means the odds are that you benefited from lack of competition.
> Where is Nadal when it comes to defend his grand slam titles when he was 23-27 ?
Rafa has defended slams from age 20,0 - 28,0 = 8,0 years
Rogi has defended slams from age 22,9 - 27,1 = 4,2 years
LOL
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Oct 12 01:18AM +1100
On 11/10/2014 11:02 PM, John Liang wrote:
>> Rafa has defended slams from age 20,0 - 28,0 = 8,0 years
> Nothing on hard court and grass court and they all come from 1 single surface that is clay.
Which makes it all the more remarkable, given there is only 1 slam on
clay so opportunity is as small as possible to defend a slam. You can't
have less opportunity than 1 slam per yr. Federer on the other hand not
only has grass & hardcourt as good surfaces for him, but 3 slams a yr
out of the 4 that are 'surface friendly'. Even so he still couldn't
defend slams as long as Rafa.
It seems your only avenue for criticizing Rafa is to completely
disregard clay/FO as if they don't exist. If we do that there is no
good reason to count Federer's grass & hardcourt slams as they are good
surfaces for him. That means Federer should be judged on his clay/FO
record alone.
>> Rogi has defended slams from age 22,9 - 27,1 = 4,2 years
> Yes, he successfully defend 3 different grand slams on 9 occassions ocmpare to Nadal who was only able to defend FO but zero in defending non clay court grand slams. Is this a sign of him been the better hard court player when he could not defend any HC titles even at his peak ?
But he had 3 slams a year on his fave surfaces, v only 1 for Rafa. If
we pro rata, Rafa is a long way ahead of Federer. Fed defended a slam 9
times, while Rafa defended 7 times despite only having 1 chance per year
v Fed's 3 chances.
If Fed is so much better than Rafa on hard courts how come Rafa leads
Fed 3-0 h2h in hardcourt slams?
RzR <2r4z0r2@gmail.com>: Oct 11 04:21PM +0200
On 10.10.2014. 9:55, Whisper wrote:
lol, give it a rest...sampras will never measure up...end of story...
Back to top
Fantastic Federer
"InsideOut" <mehico@wahaca.net>: Oct 11 03:16PM +0100
> Tennis will be fucking boring when he retires.
> Great play beautiful tennis to watch.
Well spank my ass and call me Sally! As someone put it - "did the 33 year
old "transitional weak-era champ" not just stomp the "27 year old strong era
champ" again."<g>
I agree men, Fed playing well is tennis at it's watchable and soul-filled
best. A good day for the guy.
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Oct 12 01:20AM +1100
On 12/10/2014 12:54 AM, Court_1 wrote:
> I agree with you. That was a pleasure to watch. He outplayed that attention-seeking moronic Serb in every way today. He stayed aggressive and did not lose his focus. Almost vintage Federer.
He didn't do it at Wimbledon where it really counted.
Back to top
So apparently, Nadal has appendicitis but he has decided to play on in Shanghai!
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Oct 11 06:07PM +1100
> I'll be interested to see how many slams Nadal/Djok win/defend after 28. It's pretty expected that any player does their best between 22-27. It's been true for all of Fed/Djok/Nadal. Once we see Nadal/Djok's records from 28-32 we'll be able to better compare to Fed 2010 on.
> This year doesn't reflect too well on Rafa/Djok IMO. The field has been a big notch weaker than past years with Fed being 32 and not a real factor to beat Djok/Nadal plus Murray being off form, yet Djok and Nadal only won 2 slams combined. Those two should have swept the slams this year. If one didn't win then the other should have. They are both in their prime years and still only made 2 finals each.
Well AO really 'should' have been Rafa v Djoker final. Stan barely beat
Djoker 9-7 in the 5th & then Rafa had some kind of mental breakdown in
the final.
Rafa didn't enter USO at all, & yes Djoker had that strange loss to
Nishikori.
It's still Rafa/Djoker fave for all the slams going into 2015.
TT <ascii@dprk.kp>: Oct 11 02:38PM +0300
11.10.2014 1:59, John Liang kirjoitti:
>> 43 % 39/90 Federer
>> 38 % 24/64 Murray
> Illogical as always. This would only be true if the ATP tour only have four players. Only idiot would use win % to determine the best because clearly when his favour player could not win as major titles as his main rival.
Which match are you looking forward to... Djokovic vs Federer or Simon
Youzhny?
It's all about the big boys vs each other...
Heck I don't even know who won... Simon or Youzhny.
TT <ascii@dprk.kp>: Oct 11 02:44PM +0300
11.10.2014 10:07, Whisper kirjoitti:
> Well AO really 'should' have been Rafa v Djoker final. Stan barely beat
> Djoker 9-7 in the 5th & then Rafa had some kind of mental breakdown in
> the final.
Did you not watch the AO final?
Back to top
Federer hired a fit trainer
TT <ascii@dprk.kp>: Oct 11 02:18PM +0300
11.10.2014 0:19, PeteWasLucky kirjoitti:
> http://m.tennis.com/pro-game/2014/10/roger-federers-new-physiotherapist-previously-worked-long-distance-runner/52965/#.VDg9qMvD-v0
A new pusher?
Back to top
FLIPPIN HECK! incredible play from Djoker and Ferrer
TT <ascii@dprk.kp>: Oct 10 11:33PM +0300
10.10.2014 23:13, Court_1 kirjoitti:
> Also, Ferrer supposedly still smokes
Hearsay. He apparently used to smoke.
TT <ascii@dprk.kp>: Oct 10 11:36PM +0300
10.10.2014 23:33, TT kirjoitti:
> 10.10.2014 23:13, Court_1 kirjoitti:
>> Also, Ferrer supposedly still smokes
> Hearsay. He apparently used to smoke.
On same topic:
"Braasch competed in a 'Battle of the Sexes' contest against Venus
Williams and Serena Williams at the 1998 Australian Open when he was
ranked 203. A decade and a half older than the sisters, Braasch "was a
man whose training regime centred around a pack of cigarettes and more
than a couple bottles of ice cold lager."[1] He nonetheless handily
defeated the sisters in an individual set, 6–1 on Serena, 6–2 on Venus,
while rubbing it in by smoking cigarettes during the changeover.[2][3]"
TT <ascii@dprk.kp>: Oct 10 11:48PM +0300
10.10.2014 23:37, Court_1 kirjoitti:
>> Hearsay. He apparently used to smoke.
> Nope, apparently he still does. I have read it in a bunch of places.
And I've read in bunch of places that he has quit.
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Oct 11 06:25PM +1100
On 11/10/2014 4:49 AM, TT wrote:
>>> How do you spell EPO...
>> España?
> Yes... or... F-E-D-E-R-E-R
It is odd that Federer has never skipped a slam in his life, & indeed
appears to never have pulled out of any tournament at all due to
injury/sickness.
No other player has ever enjoyed such a long run of good health. Lucky?
"Pelle Svanslös" <pelle@svans.los>: Oct 11 10:03AM +0200
On 11.10.2014 9:25, Whisper wrote:
> appears to never have pulled out of any tournament at all due to
> injury/sickness.
> No other player has ever enjoyed such a long run of good health. Lucky?
Well, if Murray, the fittest man on tour, is winded after a gruelling
point but Peddy strolls along as on a Sunday walk, there's more than
luck involved.
Somebody's on F-E-D-E-R-E-R.
--
"Got no time for jibba jabba"
Back to top
NPR: Hong Kong, a former British colony is wealthy, cosmopolitan, ... more like New York than Beijing. It enjoys far more freedoms than the mainland, including free speech and an open Internet
acoustic@panix.com (lo yeeOn): Oct 11 05:18AM
The characterizations above in the subject line can be found in
article 2) attached below (both articles attached in this posts are
from the NPR).
My reaction is: Well, I think the freedom to access the internet is by
and large a function of how savvy you are in the medium. (I have seen
another article confirming this assessment. It says something to the
effect that people on the Mainland can defeat the Chinese government's
firewall by using suitable software.)
OTOH, HK'ers probably enjoy more freedom of speech than we Americans!
For one thing, they have had more freedom to "occupy" HK than we
Americans have to occupy Wall Street, NYC, or other venues.
And HK'ers don't have an NSA and other snooping agencies to spy on
them like we Americans do.
So, an American may understandably envy a HKer for these reasons.
But cosmopolitan?
Talking about "universal suffrage" does not make you cosmopolitan.
Nor does holding a brightly lit smart phone make you radiate more
energy than the next guy who doesn't have one in his hand. And for
that matter, nor does your tactic to bring the whole town to its
knees, unless you have what you want!
Espousing a narrow view of democracy as distributed by a couple of
foreign embassies in HK is certainly not cosmopolitan.
Finally, the majority of the residents of HK are not only not wealthy,
but are in rather desperate economic straits.
We can see that the last statement is true from another NPR article:
article 1) attached below. In other words, these media sources often
generate contradictory claims.
According to that article, many HK protesters are there out of
frustration with their lack of economic well being.
"This area, it can cost you HK$2 million," he said, the equivalent
of $260,000 in the U.S. "So I think that is too crazy. ... We can't
accept that kind of price."
"This area" in the quote refers to the size of a bedroom, which NPR
did not reveal. I would not however be surprised if the bedroom
measured no more than 6' by 9' - which was what my mom, who worked as
a school teacher, and myself shared (for three or four years) in a
flat shared by four families.
I always view a lack of economic freedom to be the most serious human
bondage for the HK'ers - not the sweet words of "universal suffrage"
or the "fear" of losing the "many freedoms" that they current enjoy,
as some have insisted as the reason behind HK's current protests.
lo yeeOn
1) Economics, Tensions With Mainlanders Fuel Hong Kong's Protests
by Frank Langfitt
October 09, 2014 3:57 AM ET
http://www.npr.org/blogs/parallels/2014/10/09/354632365/economics-tensions-with-mainlanders-fuel-hong-kongs-protests
If the goal of the protesters who flooded Hong Kong streets in the
past couple of weeks can be boiled down to a word, it's "democracy."
But many real-life worries have driven that demand, including economic
ones. They range from frustration about jobs and high housing prices
competition to and a clash culture with mainland Chinese.
Perry Chong, a die-hard protester, was sitting beneath a tent in a
nearly abandoned protest zone Wednesday across from the city
government headquarters.
Chong says people want real democratic representation to address
real-world problems, such as Hong Kong's crushing housing prices. He
uses the tent he's sitting under - an area the size of a bedroom - to
illustrate some of the city's extremes.
"This area, it can cost you HK$2 million," he said, the equivalent of
$260,000 in the U.S. "So I think that is too crazy. ... We can't
accept that kind of price."
Chong, who used to work as a real estate agent, says one reason prices
are so high - and are about double what they were in 2007 - is that
newly rich mainlanders snap up apartments as investments, and often
raise eyebrows by making down payments with bags of cash.
"No Hong Kong people, no one would do things like that," says Chong,
who now works as a nurse and provided medical care to protesters. "If
our government do not stop it, we have no power to compete with them
for our house."
Across town at City University of Hong Kong, there are other kinds of
competition for grades and - eventually - jobs. Vincent Chow, a
sophomore studying finance, says 20 percent of the students in his
major are from the mainland.
He says Chinese students are very different from local Hong Kongers.
"In the weekends, [mainland students] will study, but on the weekends,
the local ones will play," Chow says. "Mainlanders have very high GPA
when they are compared to the local students."
There are also a lot of small conflicts in the dormitories, says
Joseph Cheng, a political science professor at the university,
"because these hard-working mainland Chinese students think that local
students, they don't work hard, they make too much noise, they affect
the serious academic work in the dormitories."
The economic importance of China is also having an impact on parts of
the labor market here. Cheng says personal connections - a hallmark of
mainland Chinese culture - ncreasingly influence who gets important
jobs in certain sectors in Hong Kong.
"If you come from the mainland and you have excellent connections
because you are a princeling and you come from a very powerful family,
then a lot of the financial institutions will be after you, because
you can open the doors in China," he says.
Cheng - who is also a pro-democracy activist - says these various
tensions have been building in recent years as people have become more
dissatisfied with the direction of Hong Kong and what they see as
unfairness in the system.
"Most people would tell you they encounter a decline in real living
standards," he says. "They see a widening of the gap between the rich
and poor. They see more and more collusion between the government and
the big business groups."
Of course, China - the world's seond largest economy - provides huge
benefits to Hong Kong. For example, mainland tourists made 40 million
visits to the territory last year - and gave a big boost to the local
economy.
But even that has a sting: Some Hong Kongers now must cater to wealthy
Chinese visitors. That's a big role reversal, says Michael DeGolyer, a
professor of government at Hong Kong Baptist University.
"This is really a humiliating experience to Hong Kongers, who for
many, many years thought that they were superior to mainlanders," he
says.
It's one more source of frustration for people in this former British
colony as they try to manage growing pressure from the colossus across
the border.
-----
2) On China's Mainland, A Less Charitable Take On Hong Kong's Protests
by FRANK LANGFITT and YANG ZHUO October 06, 2014
http://www.npr.org/blogs/parallels/2014/10/06/354088313/on-chinas-mainland-a-less-charitable-take-on-hong-kongs-protests
Pro-democracy protesters in Hong Kong have impressed people around the
world with their idealism, politeness and guts. But in mainland China,
the view is different.
Because the Communist Party controls the news media there, many in
China don't know that much about the demonstrations. And those who do
are likely to see the protesters as spoiled troublemakers.
To understand how many Chinese have viewed the protests, it's worth
considering how different Hong Kong, a wealthy, cosmopolitan city, is
from mainland China.
The former British colony is more like New York than Beijing. It
enjoys far more freedoms than the mainland, including free speech and
an open Internet. So when protesters took to the streets to demand
electoral democracy, some on the mainland saw them as asking for too
much, too soon.
People like Mr. Hua, who works at Shanghai's prestigious Fudan
University, and who refused to give his full name or job title because
he was afraid of getting in trouble with the authorities.
"I think Hong Kong people should be rational and return to
reality. They can live a very good life within the embrace of the
mainland," he says. "Why pursue an elusive, so-called democracy? It's
silly, right?"
Hua's thinking echoes the Communist Party's argument against
Western-style democracy: that it's not appropriate to a country like
China, which has a huge population and little in the way of civil
society, and that elections only will lead to chaos.
"These people in Hong Kong are moving too far ahead," Hua
continues. "Democracy and universal suffrage may be the ultimate form
of political system, but it doesn't mean it can be carried out in
today's China."
And Hua sees the Hong Kong protesters as presumptuous, demanding
rights no one else enjoys in China.
"Hong Kong people think too highly of themselves. They think they are
awesome." he says. Without the mainland, Hong Kong is nothing, Hua
says.
Revenge Of The 'Locusts'
One reason many mainlanders don't sympathize with people in Hong Kong
is because of bad relations between the two populations, says David
Wertime, a senior editor at Foreign Policy magazine. He focuses on
China and has been studying the mainland social-media reaction to the
protests.
In recent years, nouveau riche mainlanders have flooded Hong Kong,
buying luxury products and homes and pushing up real estate prices,
and Hong Kongers have criticized them publicly as uncouth - even
referring to them as locusts.
"Mainland tourists have felt that they've been looked down upon,"
Wertime says. "And so when you have this small city that's considered
itself separate and apart and has a little of bit of this British
colonial identity, that doesn't rub mainlanders the right way."
Most of the protesters have been clear about their ultimate goal: open
elections for Hong Kong's next chief executive.
But the demonstrations have also been dubbed "the umbrella
revolution," which might alarm mainlanders. A few demonstrators even
have waved Hong Kong's flag from British colonial days, which only
reminds mainlanders of a time when China was weak and divided.
"For many mainland Chinese who are following this, this feels like a
personal rejection - a rejection of the mainland," says Wertime.
Of the 17 people NPR interviewed on the streets of Shanghai for this
story, none expressed support for the protesters.
But some mainlanders do share their aspirations for a more open and
responsive political system - like Mr. Tong, who works as a sales
manager at a German industrial company in Shanghai and also refused to
give his full name.
"I personally think the mainland (government) should better understand
why Hong Kong people protest," he says, "because there are many young
people on the mainland who also feel very dissatisfied with the
current reality. The thing is, here, there is nothing you can do."
You can follow NPR Shanghai correspondent Frank Langfitt on Twitter
@franklangfitt.
Back to top
Since Obama has proven himself a lawless president... he says let's Import Gitmo Terrorists to the United States
Fednatic <fednatic@gmail.com>: Oct 11 10:36AM +0800
http://www.speaker.gov/press-release/speaker-boehner-statement-president-obama-s-efforts-import-gitmo-terrorists-united
Back to top
Federer's Twlight
TT <ascii@dprk.kp>: Oct 10 11:27PM +0300
10.10.2014 22:56, Court_1 kirjoitti:
> TT, you had a different graph last week and now you have changed it to try and confirm your hypothesis just like heyguys has indicated.
Bullshit. Both graphs show that level of 6-10 is constant between eras.
http://www.saunalahti.fi/~thetjt/stuff/tennis/strength%201973.jpg
http://www.saunalahti.fi/~thetjt/stuff/tennis/strength%201991.jpg
"Pelle Svanslös" <pelle@svans.los>: Oct 10 10:32PM +0200
On 10.10.2014 22:04, Court_1 wrote:
>> Carry on.
> Um, aren't you the guy who doesn't know the difference between "must
> of" and "must have?"
Could of.
> You are in no position to talk about
> intelligence
Was I talking about intelligence? Lol, no. Please learn to read.
> you unsophisticated blue-collar scrub.
You know, blue collar people pay taxes too. People with other than
trailer park high education are acutely aware of that. If you think you
associate yourself with higher education by berating honest working
people, you're wrong. You associate yourself with no-job losers working
in home "business".
--
"Got no time for jibba jabba"
"Pelle Svanslös" <pelle@svans.los>: Oct 10 11:14PM +0200
On 10.10.2014 22:49, Court_1 wrote:
>> working
>> people, you're wrong.
> I am not berating all honest working people, I am berating YOU.
Which proves I'm correct!
See, to berate me you have to use derogatory terms, or terms you think
are such. Ergo, you use blue-collar in a demeaning manner!
You're so easy.
--
"Got no time for jibba jabba"
Back to top
You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to rec.sport.tennis+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.