Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Chinese antiquities at ROM under renewed scrutiny

GEOFFREY YORK

Globe and Mail Update

Latest comment posted at 1:47 AM EST 22/01/08

New book suggests some of the Toronto museum's most precious treasures were smuggled illegally out of China in the 1930s ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. Chris E. from vancouver, Canada writes: It seems the so-called global village has limitations. With so many Chinese taking residence in Canada, doesn't it repudiate multiculturalism to care if the artifacts are here? Or does homeland matter to the Chinese after all?
  2. Andrew Watt from Ireland writes: And now China spies on our military, steals our technology secrets, and violates our copyrights. We're even, baby, and don't think you're ever getting this stuff back. If you can't keep your own house in order nobody can help you..
  3. Viv T from Toronto, Canada writes: If weren't for Bishop White, most of the artifacts would be destroyed either by the Chinese civil wars or Culture Revolution. Giving the facts that most of the artifacts in the Forbidden City are in the bad degrading conditions due to the lack of funding to preserve them, some the Chinese scholars are urging the Chinese government to aution them out in order to preserve them. It is so obvious that the preservation of artifacts remains a low priority to the Chinese government. As a Chinese Canadian, I am greatful to Biship White, who had helped to preserve a few artifacts out of millions which were being destroyed during the culture revolution, so we can view them today. Beijing is destroying its hundred year old Hutong, very narrow allyways, which consists of many hundred year old houses, with many artifacts, for 2008 Olympic games.
    If they can't even preserve their own artifacts, it's a shame that they want ours.
  4. Darcy Day from Canada writes: Viv is right. The Cultural Revolution involved a large scale destruction of China's ancient heritage.

    Bishop White saved them from destruction at the hands of the Chinese government at the time. What business does China have asking for them back now? They belong to Chinese-Canadians and all Canadians and they should stay exactly where they are.
  5. brian bishop from Brantford, Canada writes: I have to agree with Viv T from Toronto.

    Someday in the not to distant future, when China has sorted through some of it's current challenges, these artifacts can & should be returned.

    Since the Chinese government hasn't officially asked for their return, that is a good indication to me that they feel these artifacts are best served by remaining where they are for the time being.
  6. The Iconoclast from Canada writes: White men just can't do wrong! They can steal, loot, conquer, colonize and still come out as hero! It's white man's burden to save the world, getting rich along the way.
  7. Mei-Xing Xu from Canada writes: what will happen when Iraq wants its antiquities back.
  8. Mud Lark from Canada writes: Iconoclast and Mei-Xing Xu - you hit the nail on the head. The other posters sound very American - go anywhere, steal anything, then justify it by saying we are 'saving' it - at a profit of course. We are stealing their heritage as we don't have one of our own to be proud of.
  9. Neocon Destroyer from Everywhere But Alberta, Canada writes: The cross and the sword - the pillars of colonialism. It seems that it's the white man's burden to save the 'colored' people of this world from their heritage. As to Viv T's assertion that the Forbidden City is in disrepair, s/he hasn't a clue. The restoration of that place has been an unbelievable undertaking - second to none in the world. Whereas in Canada, our idea of progress is to tear it down and build a mall, the Chinese have indeed put millions of dollars into the restoration of the Forbidden City. S/he should seek out a documentary film on just what was done by the Chinese to save the contents of the Forbidden City when it was under threat and then recently to rebuild the place in the finest detail.
  10. Clark The Mighty from Canada writes: Chris E. from vancouver, Canada writes: It seems the so-called global village has limitations. With so many Chinese taking residence in Canada, doesn't it repudiate multiculturalism to care if the artifacts are here? Or does homeland matter to the Chinese after all?
    _________________

    With so many Canadians working abroad looking for work and escape from high taxes, does homeland matter to the Canadians at all?
  11. morley gasson from Toronto, Canada writes: Idiots. Using your line of reasoning, would it be ok if I came over and stole your car because I am capable of giving it a better home? Unlike you I would wash & wax it regularly and restore it to a showroom state. Of course not. It's YOUR car. If you want to let it sit and rot in your driveway, then so be it.
  12. W L from Canada writes: When White smuggled the artifacts out of China, surely he did not anticipate the cultural revolution 40 years later. As such, the theft cannot be justified with the intent of saving the treasures. The fact that the treasures were saved from cultural revolution was purely an accident. And the only way to justify the theft as preservation is to return the items to its rightful owner.

    That said, the Chinese Communists raising this issue is the pot calling the pan black. The cultural revolution destroyed far more Chinese treasures than stolen by foreigners. Even temples in Lhasa did not escape the savagery of the red guards. Besides, the law passed in 1930 was not passed by the current communist government in Beijing. It was passed by the Nationalist government in Taipei. If the treasures were to be returned, it should be returned to the National Palace Museum in Taipei, where vast amounts of Chinese treasures are kept.

    I see these accusations as a rather poor attempt to raise nationalism within the mainland. Although the current communist regime made China richer than ever before, they've also killed more Chinese and destroyed more Chinese culture than ever before. One example is the forced use of simplified Chinese writing on signs and official documents. The communist regime robbed Chinese culture more than any foreigner can steal.
  13. Jim Murray from Saint Paul, United States writes: In January 1982 I returned home after eight months in Nanjing with three small Chinese vases dating from the 1790s. Antiques from an earlier period could not legally be removed from the country. At the airport customs, my baggage was inspected and the vases found, but they had the necessary wax seal on their bottom indicating it was okay to take them out. I had bought them in the Friendship Store. I agree with the above writer who wrote that during the Cultural Revolution thousands of objects of art in 'Red' China were destroyed. The items in the ROM are lucky to be there.
  14. Chris E. from vancouver, Canada writes: Chinese nationalism, the reason for renewed interest in traditional culture, has replaced communist ideology, but the goals are the same - to unify the race of Chinese into a single force to oppose the West. Chinese nationalism will threaten the West culturally, economically, and territorially.
  15. Dana Cruickshank from Canada writes: I wouldn't worry too much about the chinese since they are not an innovative country at the moment. They are socially centuries behind the west, and economically they copy the industrial revolution. Because of this, they need the west more than we need low prices at WalMart. I'm sure they have their goals of global domination or whatever, but without inovation (and it seems that no one in the world does any inovation on any remarkable scale except the west) they will never be a threat in the purest sense of the world. The only threat is that we entagle our economy too much in theirs which is not a safe or free economy.

    They are building coal plants, we are trying to shut ours down!
  16. Mei-Xing Xu from Canada writes: Dana Cruickshank are you for real, been to China in the 80's? been to China lately?
  17. John Connor from Canada writes: The Iconoclast from Canada writes: White men just can't do wrong! They can steal, loot, conquer, colonize and still come out as hero! It's white man's burden to save the world, getting rich along the way.

    So? We are obviously doing it well. What's your point?
  18. Joe Froze from Canada writes: We should return these antiques at least some if not all to their country of origin to demonstrate that we are trustworthy and do not act like sneaky thieves. What if another country hold canada's treasuries and antique, and deny their return to us, we'll definitely not be happy either. In returning "stolen goods' to their owners will definitely improve our image internationally, and should not mess up with excuses what china is doing today.
  19. Chris E. from vancouver, Canada writes: Museums and private collections all over the world hold title on treasures that originated in other places. Should ownership be reviewed and decided by race? If so, the case for blood and soil will be next up.
  20. Clark The Mighty from Canada writes: Chris E. from vancouver, Canada writes: Museums and private collections all over the world hold title on treasures that originated in other places. Should ownership be reviewed and decided by race? If so, the case for blood and soil will be next up.
    __________

    Interesting. What are your experiences that you base this on?
  21. Jeremy K from north vancouver, Canada writes: Brian Bishop has it right. When China feels able and confident they will ask for these artifacts back officially. My guess is a successful Olympics will do a lot to build the credibility of their request. They have a strong case in as it's clear that bishop White was violating the law and he knew it at the time and was actively furtive in his efforts to circumvent inspections.

    My take on the whole "he saved them from destruction" argument is that without people like him the artifacts would still be in the ground safe and secure for future generations of archaeologists to excavate properly. Grave robbery only happens because it is profitable.
  22. Chris E. from vancouver, Canada writes: We already know that blood and soil are the basis of first immigrant land claims, regardless of the fact that everyone on the planet has been displaced or assimilated at one time or another, because they didn't mount a successful defence.

    There have also been successful property claims made by Jewish claimants, that works of art should be returned to them because they were sold under duress, albeit legally, to raise money to migrate out of pre-war Germany. Where should reversals of history end?

    Everyone should remember that 'facts on the ground', once created, are hard to roll back. This is the case for guarded conservatism.
  23. Randal Oulton from Canada writes: I call on the ROM to donate all its Chinese artifacts back to China.
  24. J. W from Toronto, Canada writes: If we are insisting on the return of "Nazi"artwork - taken and sold to innocent purchasers then why not in this case?

    Should this art not be returned to the rightful owners - China?

    Bishop White appears to have died a rich man as result oof his acqusitions - shame on him.

  25. Clark Kent from Canada writes: If the ROM gives them back, it should be to the Republic of China.
  26. George Hall from Canada writes: One should try to do the honourable thing....maybe negotiate with the Chinese and definitely return these artifacts .....these things really don't mean all that much and it is better to demonstrate noble and generous action
  27. Tom Willette from Niagara Falls, Canada writes: As someone mentioned above, we want to see stolen Nazi loot returned and so should these artifacts that were illegally removed from China.
  28. Chris Cosack from Toronto, Canada writes: Granted I read the article a little quickly, but I don't remember it mentioning any 'theft', merely that he evaded customs law. Granted, he acted illegally, but I think the comparison to Nazi art collection - done largely by force - is a bit of a stretch. My second point: I wonder how much of any museums collection has been amassed by less then legal (or moral) means. Thinking of the great colonial excursions into the Middle East, Africa, South America - how much of this loot sits on display in Western museums? I am not saying that this is an entirely bad thing, just that it might provide some context for this particular article, and might check the suggestions of those critics who have called for a return of these items.
  29. X. T. from Waterloo, Canada writes: Chris Cosack from Toronto:
    Those items are illegally collected in China, and smuggled out of China. Many of these items are simply results of tomb robberies or like. It is illegal to own stolen items, even it is paid for a fair price.
  30. W L from Canada writes: Well it seems that the British tops the list of nationalities where its national museum contain foreign artifacts obtained by questionable means.

    Aside from the Anglican Bishop Bill White stealing Chinese artifacts, it seems Lord Elgin "removed" some marble sculptures from the Parthenon for the British museum and British troops transported Egyptian Rosetta Stone back to England instead of Cairo.

    Considering that Canada's head of state today is the Queen of England. In the 1930's the British must have had strong influence in the Anglican church of Canada.

    Therefore, Canadians need not feel too bad for stealing. The British were far better at it. I can only wonder how much more foreign artifacts the British Museum has than the ROM.
  31. sean wood from vancouver, Canada writes: Obviously, the methods used in the 20's and 30's to gather artwork and cultural items from different civilizations, are today considered politically incorrect. If China wants all these examples of their civilization back then I would suppose we should honour such a request. However, having viewed these incredible examples of advanced civilization, I was afforded a chance to appreciate the rich and dynamic culture of China. This opportunity afforded me an insight into another culture that I would not normally have had. In the interests of cultural understanding, these beautiful examples of Chinese art could be left at the ROM to further the cause of this appreciation for other civilizations.
  32. Kuhl Cukumber from Toronto, Canada writes: This book was published in 2005 (http://www.utppublishing.com/pubstore/merchant.ihtml?pid=8272&step=4). Why does the reporter call it a "new book"? Where is the "renewed scrutiny"?
  33. gene eng from Markham, Canada writes: W L from Canada made excellent points. Couldn't have said it better.
  34. D. B. from Greater Sask., Canada writes: Of course these works should go back to China. China was one of the earliest civilizations in the world. Our Anglo-Saxon ancestors were 'grooving in a cave' (according to one respected authority, Pink Floyd) while China was flourishing as a civilization. To be fair to our ancestors, they were doing their best under the circumstances. But this is China's history and these works should be in China.
  35. Charles Lo from Canada writes: I do not fully about with Viv T. I agree that Bishop White might have saved some of the artifacts from the cultural revolution. I am not sure if the guy did it because he wanted to help preserve the history, or for his own profit. This article suggests the latter.

    The artifacts are China's, and should go back there, IMHO. If there are concern about how they will be preserved, then ROM and/or Cdn gov't might be able to help get them back in a popular musuem somewhere in China to ensure proper attention/preservation.

    I would not generalize the Chinese gov't action of destroying the narrow, ancient buildings and streets to them not caring ALL of their national treasures. There are problems in the Chinese gov't, and so does every other gov't on Earth. If we don't see a clear indication that the Chinese gov't will neglect their precious artifacts we have in ROM, then I don't see any reason not to return them.
  36. D. B. from Greater Sask., Canada writes: Charles Lo: I agree with much of what you say, but I don't think it is up to us to evaluate the ability of the Chinese to take care of their own history. I think they are more than up to the task. I wonder how we are doing on that front, by the way? Our First Nations history: we are keeping it from the First Nations. Actually, I guess the only things that North American museums should have are things from North American history.
  37. Open Mike from Vancouver, Canada writes: So here's what we do, folks. The science of replication is mature, allowing the construction of replicas so close to the original articles that even experts have to work hard to distinguish them. What we do is find out from the Chinese government what they want returned and what we can keep, get formal permission from them to reproduce each returnable item, copy them as exactly as possible, and use the replicas for display in our museums so we can continue to appreciate the breathtaking beauty and sophistication of historical Chinese culture. Then---on our nickel, since we're the ones who 'collected' them---we rehabilitate the originals back to China for them to do with as they, the proper owners, see fit (as long as they promise not melt the metal bits down to make cannonballs). There, that wasn't so hard, was it?

    It's not an original idea: in the 1920's a Haisla totem pole was 'collected' from British Columbia without the knowledge of the Haisla people. It was eventually located in the National Museum of Ethnography in Sweden; after negotiation in the 1990's between the Haisla and the museum, the original totem pole was returned to its rightful owners and a replica crafted by the Haisla was sent to Sweden. There's a wonderful NFB doc about this civilised resolution to the problem called Totem: The Return of the G'psgolox Pole, by Gil Cardinal. As long as the thing is done in good faith on both sides, without bloodyminded stubbornness and stupidity, everyone wins.
  38. Ryan Ginger from ottawa, Canada writes: ...Yes, yes, rush these baubles back to China. That way, the Canadian public can learn about or appreciate absolutely NOTHING from China's rich cultural history. Maybe if the Chinese stopped destroying known archaeological sites for massive construction projects, they could have their own artifacts. Anyway, this is pure politics--as are all "repatriation" issues, domestic or international. These artifacts will, invariably, become attention-getting pawns in a big Chess match that involves global trade, among other REAL issues.

    Mei-Xing Xu asks "what will happen when Iraq wants its antiquities back?" That's a completely different situation--Americans invaded Iraq. Iraqis already want their antiquities back, and there are international organizations that are working to stop the traffic in Iraq antiquities and return what is now circulating. And yes, US researchers are spearheading this effort, along with international colleagues.
  39. Frank Godfrey from Canada writes: The Chinese collection at the ROM has provided an outstanding showcase for this unique civilization to millions of people from all ethnic backgrounds. Clearly, questions of " legal " provenance are sticky issues for collections all over the world today. Whatever form the discussion might take in the particular case of the ROM's Chinese collection, the fact remains the Museum offers a remarkable window into Chinese civilization. Why not work to make the showcase for Chinese cultural history even better ? Some give and take on all sides of the issue should make that happen.
  40. Andrew Watt from Ireland writes: This scenario is incomparable to looted Nazi artwork. If the pieces were obtained by legitimate trade with both sides understanding what they were getting in return then the exchange is legal. Yes, even if the transaction was surrounded by civil war. They were not stolen or plundered like Nazi loot from European jews. The question is were they smuggled out illegally. Well it will be pretty much impossible to prove beyond dispute that there were definite enforceable laws concerning smuggling that were broken. And if an argument for smuggling was proven beyond all doubt, then the goods would have to be returned within the borders of China. They would still be the property of the ROM as they were purchased legitimately. The debate in question is the transfer of the goods across borders. Jeez all you bleeding hearts out there who think Bishop White and the good folks at the ROM are evil white men just like the Nazis need to get a life, graduate from liberal arts school, and enter the real world.
  41. Mei-Xing Xu from Canada writes: understandably Jews want their looted artwork and valuables, as understandably Chinese want their looted valuables back too. Britain plundered so many treasures from Brunei, and holds them like they are their own , like common criminals. Saddam protected Iraq's antiquities, yet in a span of 10 days or so, after the occupation / invasion, some of the most intense antiquity looting ever ,took place in a very very short period of time, supervised by the occupiers.

    We want justice when it happens to one group, yet for other groups its deemed ok, that is not acceptable.
  42. gene eng from Markham, Canada writes: From the report, these treasures were not looted, but they were shipped out from China through its porous customs at the time, and then legitimately acquired by ROM. Give ROM and Canada credit though - these treasures have been very well preserved and presented. The ROM displays give honour to Chinese history and culture, rather than to diminish it.

    What is the point in trying to re-right all the historical wrongs? Do we repatriate all the illegal immigrants then? Should Canada be returned to the natives? Should Beijing be returned to the Nationanlists? Acknowledge the injustices, and move on.
  43. c l from Canada writes: gene eng is correct to assert that Canada cannot re-right all historical wrongs. But in cases where there is unequivocal evidence that Canada has done wrong in the past, Canada has made and is making amends. Native Residential School, Native Land Settlements, and Maher Arar are a few cases where the Canadian government have been proven wrong and the Canadian government are now actively seeking to correct their mistake. The Canadian government cannot correct all its errors, but where there is unequivocal and surmounting evidence, the Canadian Government has a responsibility - under the practice of the 'rule of law' - to rectify injustices. And that means if the Chinese government were to prove - without a doubt - that the ROM has illegally acquired their collections, then there is an onus on the the Canadian government and the ROM to return those items to China. This is regardless of Chinese government's incompetence in maintaining their current historical collection because that has no legal precedent. There is an onus on the Canadian government and Canadians to respect Chinese Law, International Law and Canadian Law. If it was not for international convention, and inter-governmental cooperation, famous paintings belong to Jewish survivors of the Jewish Holocaust would have not been returned to those Jewish families. These paintings are returned regardless of who the current owner is and who the previous owners are. Historical injustices can make be amends, as long as the law allows it to be.
  44. C L from Canada writes: D. B: i agree with u that it's not up to us to evaluate the ability of the Chinese to take care of their own history. But for those who are concern where they'll end up after giving back to the Chinese, ROM or the Cdn gov't can ask or give suggestions. Once the artifacts are in China's hand, I don't think any foreigner can control what the Chinese do with them. I do not think the Chinese would be so stupid to destroy or neglect them for no reason.
  45. Ryan Ginger from ottawa, Canada writes: Chinese officials willingly opened their national borders to these artifacts in the 1930s, gleefully sending them abroad. That these artifacts were more appreciated by well-intentioned people in North American than the Chinese Government says more about the failings of the Chinese Government in the 1930s--their inability to recognize their own cultural heritage--than it does about the failings of the Canadian Government (or the ROM, more specifically).

    Power to the ROM for stepping up and saving these artifacts from the hands of private collectors, Chinese or otherwise. They belong in the public trust.
  46. Ryan Ginger from ottawa, Canada writes: C L from Canada writes: "I do not think the Chinese would be so stupid to destroy or neglect them for no reason."

    True, but museums are always under great financial pressure, and who knows what will happen in 10, 20 or 30 years. And the right of ownership entails the right to sell. Some recent examples: last year, a Russian museum curator was indicted for selling off artifacts (to nouveau-rich Russians and Americans, usually) to help pay for maintenance costs for his decaying museum. And this is not just a problem in "other" parts of the world: some Native American tribes, for financial reasons, have auctioned artifacts that were legally "repatriated" under US Repatriation legislation.

    We are living in a fantasy world if we think these artifacts will continue to be immune from market forces. One they are out of the public trust, they are gone. Poof.
  47. MKK Flatron from Waterloo, Canada writes: Aren't most of the artifacts in museums stolen in one way or another?
  48. The Iconoclast from Canada writes: Ryan Ginger - are you for real?
  49. Ryan Ginger from ottawa, Canada writes: Iconoclast - yes, I'm for real.
  50. C L from Canada writes: Rayn Ginger: I do see your concern. Artifacts under ROM has the same risk. I do not know how ROM operates, nor how Chinese musuems operate. You give benefit of the doubt to ROM which I understand. Just because i am ignorant of how the Chinese gov't and Chinese muesuems, that doesn't mean I have the right to say the artifacts belongs to ROM.

    Just because there's a risk of accident causing death driving in the U.S., doesn't mean I don't rent a car and drive there on business trip or vacation.

    Everyone's comfort level is different, and I respectfully disagree.
  51. Steven Yang from Canada writes: I visited ROM last summer and was amazed to see so many chinese stuff there. Thanks to this G&M article which let me know where they come from.

    Shame to the Anglican bishop, whose acts were unhonorable and shall not be justified by any excuse. I am wondering how much damage his wrongdoing brought to the promotion of religion in China.
  52. Tian Feng from Hangzhou, China writes: I hate to say it this way but lest just wait a little longer until the preservation of artifacts in china takes precedence over the construction projects. I was looking to take more archeology and anthropology classes here at University in China and when I asked about it to most people they laughed at me. They said "why would you want to do that? There is no money to be made in Archeology. They are the poorest department in the Whole University." Outside of the main places like The forbidden city, the great wall and Xi'an preservation is less than spectacular. My interest is mostly in The ethnic minorities in the south of China and their cultural relics even today are just being ignored by the Majority Han. I really think this, however, is improving in China. I know it is hard to tell a country they should wait a little longer for their stuff but If I left politics and PC out of it and just thought about the artifacts, this would be my answer.
  53. Tian Feng from hangzhou, China writes: Anyone read the York article? Isn't this kind of a contrast between two Canadians and their methods.
  54. D. B. from Greater Sask., Canada writes: I can't help but think that the West's 'hoarding' of treasures from other civilizations is evidence of our neo-colonialism. China is one of the oldest civilizations in the world.

    As for the bishop, I can only say: 'Where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.' That seems to be applicable to the Christian religion today, in so many ways.
  55. jojo savard from Canada writes: Dana Cruickshank from Canada writes: I wouldn't worry too much about the chinese since they are not an innovative country at the moment. They are socially centuries behind the west, and economically they copy the industrial revolution. Because of this, they need the west more than we need low prices at WalMart.

    Ha! how ignorant. Been to a Canadian University lately? The brightest and hardest working kids are from China. We are a bunch of lazy dumbasses compared to them. China is rising while sit back and goof off.
  56. jojo savard from Canada writes: W L from Canada writes: ...Considering that Canada's head of state today is the Queen of England. In the 1930's the British must have had strong influence in the Anglican church of Canada...

    That puts the "Royal" in ROM then. Eupemism for "plunderer"
  57. jones smith from Edmonton, Canada writes: Jim Murray: you bought vases from the 1790s at the Friendship Store? Just guessing - you paid too much and the service was surly and they can't possibly be real.

    Wonder what happened to the artifacts dug up in the construction of the Beijing Olympics buildings? Or were they just dug over, like the bodies of the migrant workers that died building them?
  58. David Gibson from Hamilton, Canada writes: When China gets a government which can legitimately be said to more or less represent its population, then we can talk. Until then, we're hanging on to the baubles for safekeeping. We should have gotten the Terracotta Army as well, but it's kind of big.
  59. Frank The Tank from Argentina writes: David Gibson from Hamilton, Canada writes: When China gets a government which can legitimately be said to more or less represent its population, then we can talk.
    -----------------------------
    Actually, if an election were held tomorrow or a year from now the communist gov't would win a landslide victory. Regardless I don't see how that's relavent. Stolen property is still stolen property.

    The Chinese govt doesnt seem to mind though as it is eager to share its culture to the world.
  60. Jack Robertson from Toronto, Canada writes: Let's make a deal with the Chinese. If they want Canada to return the antiquities in question, the government of the so-called People's Republic of China must do the following: grant total independence to Tibet and withdraw all Chinese troops from the country; renounce any claim to Taiwan and cease all attempts to 're-unite' it with the mainland; free all political prisoners; stop the persecution of Falun Gong and any other group or organization that engages in peaceful political protest; hold free and fair multi-party elections; stop the practices of forced abortion and female infanticide; abolish capital punishment; stop the use of torture and the harvesting of prisoners' organs; grant full political rights to all Chinese citizens. Until and unless the Chinese government agrees to such conditions, not a shard of pottery should ever be returned.
  61. Mei-Xing Xu from Canada writes: so Jack Robertson from Toronto if someone steals your car / money / gold / whatever ,they should not return it until their demands are made of you. theives are in no position to make demands.
  62. Jack Robertson from Toronto, Canada writes: 'Thieves' have every right to make demands when they are dealing with murderers. Whether they will succeed or not is another matter.
  63. Mei-Xing Xu from Canada writes: ok Jack, so if Jewish goods are found, should they be held onto by someone else until apartheid is abolished in Israel, this is the type of logic you are spouting. American goods definitely held onto, as they used mass amounts of chemical weapons in Vietnam and Iraq and a host of other places leading to havoc in food chains and deformed babies amongst other things. IMHO , though I respect your right to opinion, I feel your logic is flawed and reactionary.

    Jack I mean no disrespect but I feel you do not understand China and I feel you cannot speak or read Chinese either. Do not fall victem to propaganda spread by English language sites, funded by certain governments. Your smarter then that.
  64. SN Dream from Canada writes: Jack Robertson,

    What religion did you learn your moral and logic from?

    Regarding to your so call "demand", other than the issues of forced abortion by local government, all others are either base on ridiculous logic or pure lies.

    You are basically demanding China to
    1) Give away significant part of its country.
    2) Legalize cult and stop capital punishment. Even Canada won't do the first and US, our main allies is a big support of the second.
    3) Cease doing a bunch of lies you accused them of doing.

    You sure you just got their pottery hostage? You at least need to have some type of WMD to make demand like that.

    And even the problem of forced abortion are really a policy but rather a tragedy of the central government inability to control corrupted local official at rural.

Comments are closed

Thanks for your interest in commenting on this article, however we are no longer accepting submissions. If you would like, you may send a letter to the editor.

Report an abusive comment to our editorial staff

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.