Peace upon Earth and goodwill to all men.

#1
'Forced drinking' widely unpopular
(China Daily)
Updated: 2007-02-12 06:55

Half of the respondents to a recent survey said they did not like being forced to drink alcohol at banquets, a custom that is considered to be part of the country's "liquor culture".

According to the results of the survey, conducted by China Central Television's (CCTV) Oriental Horizon program, half of the respondents said they disliked being forced to drink, 35 percent were neutral and 15 percent said it was a Chinese custom that should be preserved.

"Forced drinking", spitting, blowing one's nose without using a handkerchief and smoking in public are among the top 10 worst habits, according to another survey carried out by the China Association for Science and Technology.

Excessive drinking is not only unpopular, it can be deadly.

According to official figures released by the Ministry of Public Security, nearly 90,000 people died in road accidents last year. Speeding, exhaustion and drunk driving were the top three killers.

"If people were not urged to drink too much at dinner, we would have fewer road accidents," said Huang Shubo, an army officer in Beijing.

However, drinking is widely considered an effective way to clinch business deals and secure favors because people are more pliant after consuming alcohol.

It is common in China to treat guests or inspectors to big dinners to make them "feel at home", but sometimes the hospitality backfires.

In August 2006, Zhang Hongtao died from alcohol poisoning while auditing a power grid and transformation project in north China's Hebei Province.

People have to drink even if they do not want to, Huang said, adding that the friendship and influence of the host is at stake at such gatherings.

"I hate drinking too much, but I don't like to embarrass my friends and superiors when they make a toast," Huang said.

Ma Zhenbiao from the Beijing City Bar Association struck a similar note.

"There's a limit to showing one's respect with liquor," he said.

"If people are aware of the dangers of drinking, such as driving under the influence, and still urge people to drink, they will be legally responsible for accidents that occur," said Ma Zhenbiao.

Last February, a man in East China's Zhejiang Province died after his colleagues forced him to drink. They were later brought to court and asked to offer compensation to the victim's family.

"Pressing people to drink means ruining their health under the guise of friendship," said Ke Qinglin, a professor at the Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) General Hospital. He added excessive drinking caused serious health problems, such as high blood pressure, cirrhosis of the liver and heart disease.

Yu Xingqian, director of the China poetry and wine culture association, which is affiliated with the Ministry of Culture, said some people could become irrational and even commit crimes if they drank too much.

"We should promote an elegant drinking culture, in which liquor is savored not swallowed, and drunkenness is rejected," said Yu, adding that "vulgar practices such as urging or compelling people to drink should be disparaged".

China is one of the world's largest makers of alcoholic drinks. In 2005, the country produced over 38 million tons of alcoholic drinks. It is estimated that there are over 500 million drinkers in China.

China Daily-Xinhua
 
#5
And like China gives a monkeys about what these Human Rights people say
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
#9
Let me see, when I was being a nice open minded chap and shared a house with a Muslim Doctor he told me all about how islam spread learning, language, mathematics and science. All of this at a time when we in the west were in the dark ages and scared of our own shadows.
I now think that it is Islam as a system (not a religion it controls far more in its believers lives than any "religion" could reasonably expect) is now stuck in the dark ages. If this is so then when will there be a renaissance for this system and when will the light be shone on them?
If christianity is 2000 yrs old and Islam is 1400 years old do I have to wait 600 years for them to civilise along our lines?
There is no way that big rich Arab states will allow the radicals too much power as they prefer to use a feudal system allied with moderate by their own standards of religeous oppression to control their masses.
Does this mean that in 600 years from now they will sit at the table of negotiation and behave? Does this mean that we have up to 600 years of mad suicidal attacks on our way of life?
No kebabs for me from now on its chinese take aways for that special touch!
 
#10
"Splitting the Motherland" - now there's a Charge. Beats the sh1t out of Section 69 anytime.

You would have thought these bucko-me-lads would have taken the hint from the Chinese. Heading for Uzbekistan not such a good Plan A either.

"Nicholas Bequelin, a Hong Kong-based China researcher for Human Rights Watch, said: “The death penalty was widely disproportionate to the alleged crimes . . . his trial did not meet minimum requirements of fairness and due process. We don’t think there was sufficient evidence to condemn him.”

Unfortunately Nick, the Beak did .. and did!
 
#11
rickshaw-major said:
"Nicholas Bequelin, a Hong Kong-based China researcher for Human Rights Watch, said: “The death penalty was widely disproportionate to the alleged crimes . . . his trial did not meet minimum requirements of fairness and due process. We don’t think there was sufficient evidence to condemn him.”

Unfortunately Nick, the Beak did .. and did!
Well, since the US and UK ignored the UN on Resolution 1441 prior to rumbling into Iraq in 2003, we are in no position to question China and their definition of Human Rights FFS.
 
#13
O2Thief said:
rickshaw-major said:
"Nicholas Bequelin, a Hong Kong-based China researcher for Human Rights Watch, said: “The death penalty was widely disproportionate to the alleged crimes . . . his trial did not meet minimum requirements of fairness and due process. We don’t think there was sufficient evidence to condemn him.”

Unfortunately Nick, the Beak did .. and did!
Well, since the US and UK ignored the UN on Resolution 1441 prior to rumbling into Iraq in 2003, we are in no position to question China and their definition of Human Rights FFS.
Who's questioning it? Can you see anything questioning it?
 
#14
rickshaw-major said:
O2Thief said:
rickshaw-major said:
"Nicholas Bequelin, a Hong Kong-based China researcher for Human Rights Watch, said: “The death penalty was widely disproportionate to the alleged crimes . . . his trial did not meet minimum requirements of fairness and due process. We don’t think there was sufficient evidence to condemn him.”

Unfortunately Nick, the Beak did .. and did!
Well, since the US and UK ignored the UN on Resolution 1441 prior to rumbling into Iraq in 2003, we are in no position to question China and their definition of Human Rights FFS.
Who's questioning it? Can you see anything questioning it?
It wasn't a dig at you r_s so please STFU. :thumleft: It was a parallel with Nicks remarks, that's all.
 
#15
O2Thief said:
rickshaw-major said:
O2Thief said:
rickshaw-major said:
"Nicholas Bequelin, a Hong Kong-based China researcher for Human Rights Watch, said: “The death penalty was widely disproportionate to the alleged crimes . . . his trial did not meet minimum requirements of fairness and due process. We don’t think there was sufficient evidence to condemn him.”

Unfortunately Nick, the Beak did .. and did!
Well, since the US and UK ignored the UN on Resolution 1441 prior to rumbling into Iraq in 2003, we are in no position to question China and their definition of Human Rights FFS.
Who's questioning it? Can you see anything questioning it?
It wasn't a dig at you r_s so please STFU. :thumleft: It was a parallel with Nicks remarks, that's all.
No offence taken. So were you criticising Human Rights Watch for their viewpoint?
 
#16
i hope this current chinese trend catches on,can we send our muslim firebrands on a one way ticket to shanghai??we could call them our own chinese take aways. :threaten:
 
#17
rickshaw-major said:
[Who's questioning it? Can you see anything questioning it?
It wasn't a dig at you r_s so please STFU. :thumleft: It was a parallel with Nicks remarks, that's all.[/quote]

No offence taken. So were you criticising Human Rights Watch for their viewpoint?[/quote]

I'm saying that a democracy like the US can jump on Iraq against the will of the UN... what's that all about FFS? So, why the fcuk should we be concerned (and question) the Chinese for executing a Muslim activist? It's their turf and they can defend it however they see fit. If we were a little more like them maybe the UK would not be such a soft breeding ground for extremists. IMHO.

Edit to add, if someone has a problem with the Chinese over this then I'm sure they would say (in Chinese), 'Yea, and what the fcuk are you going to do about it?"
 
#18
did read a thing a while back (dont ask where as I cant remember) that said this was radical Islam’s last fling. After this globalization will wear away the lunacy and they will have a choice - conform or face extinction.

I look forward to visiting The Prophet Muhammad’s Butt Naked Pole Dancing and Topless Whiskey Emporium on my next trip to Saudi.
 

Latest Threads

Top