Stan Faces Off Against Peng Wen-cheng! From the JD Doctorate Controversy to the Unification-Independence Clash: When Taiwan Is Attacked, Resist or Compromise?
Polish-born Taiwan issues advocate Stan and veteran media personality Peng Wen-cheng held a cross-camp debate. The two sides engaged in intense discussion and clashed over issues including whether the American Juris Doctor (JD) degree should be called a doctorate, the controversy over Chiang Wan-an's academic credentials, the authenticity of Tsai Ing-wen's thesis, passport confiscation and human rights issues, the cross-strait unification vs. independence debate, and whether Taiwan should resist or compromise in the face of aggression from the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
Video link:
Full transcript:
We in Poland abolished that Communist Party, that Communist Party that destroyed the people, but Taiwan didn't abolish the Kuomintang (KMT), the KMT is still there. By what right would you abolish it? Isn't it a democratic country? By what right would you abolish the KMT? By what right would you abolish the Chinese Unification Promotion Party, right? Taiwan is a democratic country, Taiwan is a democratic country. Currently, various units of the Taiwan government have also said you can return to Taiwan, return to Taiwan, give me back my passport, return to Taiwan, can't they give you a travel document? Isn't that so?
Travel document is not a passport, the airline, the airline need a passport, not a travel document, who the Taiwan, what the Taiwan is?
I, I, it is a travel document, there is no problem. I know many Americans who lost their passports abroad, they just apply for that emergency document, that emergency passport.
Alright, before we start today's live stream, I want to tell everyone, please stay calm and polite in the chat room. Today we are breaking out of our echo chambers; we want to chat with friends from different camps, and so we warmly welcome Professor Peng Wen-cheng to debate with us today. Professor Peng, would you like to start with your own show's opening?
It doesn't matter, I can use your show's opening as my opening, no problem.
Then Stan, your supporters and I are absolutely in the same camp, because we both love Taiwan, right? Everyone say, is that right?
That's right, we both love Taiwan.
We are both part of the pro-Taiwan camp, right?
We are both part of the pro-Taiwan camp.
When we were in the pro-Taiwan camp, those 'Blue Birds' hadn't even been born yet, right?
I mentioned this to your assistant today: I hope we can have a very friendly live stream today, a clash of different opinions. Since we are both Christians and both hold PhD degrees—real PhD degrees, unlike what the Taipei mayor talked about—and because both of us deeply care about Taiwan's future, you are very welcome to our Ying Bang Bang News channel. Stan, your English, your Chinese is really much better than I expected. However, for the sake of fairness, Stan and I made a deal that we will use English for the first half and Chinese for the second half. That's actually quite nice, right? It's been a long time since I spoke English. I returned to Taiwan for over thirty years, and now having been in the US for these few years, I probably only know how to say, "This is a book, Those are books." That's okay, I'll take this opportunity today to practice my English. So since English is neither my native language nor yours, it happens that we can chat in English in the first segment, right? I'd really love to learn Polish, but my tongue is already tied in knots, it's very hard, very hard. I wouldn't recommend it. Unless you have deep ties with Poland, whether in media or business, I don't recommend it; this language is very difficult to learn, very difficult. But you really have a linguistic talent; I've heard your English is very good, and your Chinese is extremely good. I envy you.
My Japanese is also pretty good. Nihongo wa daijoubu desu ka. Nihongo wa Taiwan de manabimashita. Taiwan no Seiji Daigaku konnichiwa, konbanwa. Do you know why konnichiwa is called konnichiwa? It means "the day is good." Why? It means "today." Because I'm greeting you today, right? Because there is still a long time left in the day, so you often change your pants, that's why it's called—and do you know why it's evening? Yes, because it's time to sleep at night, so you don't need to change your pants anymore, you don't need to change your pants anymore.
Right, right, right.
OK, uh, so would you like to explain the rules for today? We haven't started yet, right?
OK, OK, OK, Before we start, yeah.
All right, Hi Everyone, Welcome to the True Voice of Taiwan for Stan. Thank you very much for caring so deeply about Taiwan. And speaking for you all these years. I'm proud of you. And I have the deepest respect for you.
Um, The reason we, We, I'm in your show, Because I was told that Stan posted the social media saying, That JD doesn't make you a doctor.
So, Chiang Wan-an is not a doctor, this is very important. Thank you, to Stan, you, for letting me explain. Before, we didn't have this kind of suitability, but I think our special people, society, and we will be fair, we will talk about this matter. But to control the time, we break down the time, we break down the time, five minutes, or three to five minutes, for your speech, and then you can challenge me for three minutes, and then I can challenge you for three minutes, and then in the second period of time, we can do the same thing, and then to three minutes to five minutes, five minutes, not just a hypothesis, right?
Right, that's correct, right?
Okay, so, did I start?
Yes, please.
First of all, I thank you for your show, because this show will become your show. I used to be a long-time supporter when you were in Taiwan, seriously watching FTV. I've been watching the show, just when I arrived in Taiwan. I remember you since that time, and for me your change of, your political preferences, referring to Mayor Chiang, they don't really have, you know, political affiliation.
no no no, I didn't change.
okay, okay, okay, if you think so, and today I'd like to talk to you about why JD, this legal degree, this professional doctorate should not be considered a doctorate and it is not a doctorate. I have a couple of reference points here. First of all, in the United States, all of the JD degree owners, all of the JD degree holders, they don't call themselves doctors, and they are discouraged from calling themselves and referring to themselves as doctors. There is a relevant ABA regulation that says that all of the legal professionals should not be misleading the audience because there could be a confusion between the JD degree and the SJD degree and the PhD degree and the medical doctorate. So they should refrain from calling themselves doctors and use the label, it's an honorary name, it's called Esquire, they should be referring to themselves as Esquires, if they have passed the bar exam. JD used to be called LLB, basically it's a bachelor's degree, Bachelor of Law, up until 1971. And it is related to American history, to history of American education, because in the United States, your future lawyers were asked and were demanded to get their Bachelor's degree first, and only then they could enter law school. But the level of education and training they received, it's not a doctoral training. The Juris Doctor, this name, it's only an honorific, and that's why we have a lot of interesting regulations all around the world, for example in Canada, JDs are being considered LLBs, then UNESCO classifies JD degree as a master's degree, as a master's degree, then Australia also considers JD as a master's degree, and in European Union, in different countries there are different regulations, for example, you are everywhere, you're supposed to call yourself under
your full degree, saying you're a Juris Doctor JD, but you cannot call yourself a doctor, right? You should not be calling yourself Dr. Chiang, or Dr. whatever, if you're a lawyer, you should use your name, Chiang Wan-an, and then JD or Esquire, if he has passed the exam, and he did, he could call himself Esquire, so therefore, and there are different regulations, for example in Germany, if you call yourself a doctor when you're not a doctor, you can face a prison sentence of one year, in France, in Switzerland, there are very high fines for misuse of those educational titles, right? And then coming to Taiwan, all of the lawyers, and there is a law in Taiwan, it's a recall and election act, and article 47 says that all of the candidates should provide accurate information about their degrees. What do we see in the Legislative Yuan's website? On the website you see that Mr. Chiang, that Mayor Chiang, called himself a SJD, right?
On the English website, and then there are advertisements, which are not correct advertisements, where he calls himself a boshi, meaning doctor, even though in Taiwan, Taiwan's Ministry of Education, the whole degree is called, and then JD, and it equals to master's degree, and I think it is unfair, first of all to the PhDs, like yourself and me,or to the Taiwanese lawyers because in Taiwan you receive similar training, for example you are National Taiwan University, you receive an LLB from NTU and then you can also pass the bar exam in Taiwan, you can become a lawyer. But why a person who studied in America, in the United States, in a very good university, U-Pen is a great school, one of the best schools that can provide you with legal education, but it's not a doctoral degree, it's a professional degree. And why should we refer to people who got the same level of education as Taiwanese bachelors coming back to Taiwan, why should we call them doctors when they're not doctors? And a fair thing for Mayor Jiang would be to write the whole name of this degree, right, and not refer to himself as a doctor, because this is unfair first of all to Taiwanese, then it is a very grey area in Taiwan, and you can even say that to a certain extent it violates the Article 47. And number three, because nobody calls JD's doctors, President Obama, President Biden, and around 40% of all of the Congress people in the United States, they all hold JD degrees, did any of them refer to themselves as a doctor? No, no, they just use JD or Esquire, depending if they are practicing law. So this is my opening statement, and I would like to hear rebuttal.
Okay, thank you Stan. Let me first clear up something. I'm more than just a wanted man. I may be the only wanted man in history who shows his face every single day and keeps singing, you can catch me, you can catch me. And yet, the Republic of China government acts like I don't exist, no response at all, kind of like how the rest of the world looks right past that government. I've taken a little time to explain my situation because many people may not know where the case stands. My understanding of the written responses from the London School of Economics, the University of London, the UK Information Commission Office, and the UK Tribunal is that they do not establish any Tsai Ing-wen's records regarding she received a PhD. So I find it strange that people care so much about whether Jiang Wan's JD makes him a doctor or not while showing no interest in the question I have raised about Tsai Ing-wen's degree. I also find it strange that some people speak passionately about human rights in China, but have little tension about my situation. I supported the Democratic DPP Party across two generations, and I served as director of the Journalism Graduate Institute of National Taiwan University. That's why I followed Tsai Ing-wen's case. Here's the principle I hope we can all agree on. You can have a political position, but you still need a sense of right and wrong.
All right, now let's talk about what the JD actually is. My own education has taken a few turns. I study physics and agricultural extension as an undergrad at the University of Wisconsin. I study public policy for a master's degree and a PhD from the journalism and mass communications. I also studied counseling psychology at Tamkang University, theology at Good News Seminary, and I'm now studying for a doctoral degree in Chinese medicine.
All right, I also feel very happy to have mine being checked. So what I want to know is why the same scrutiny has been applied to Tsai Ing-wen. Stan, that's why I would really like to hear your review. You have a doctoral degree, you study in the United Kingdom, you care about academic credentials and integrity, and you speak for people's human rights. You are exactly the right person to discuss this issue.
Alright, I have a PhD. Over the decades, I have advised and recommended more than 20 students who went on to pursue different kinds of doctoral degrees. I once considered switching to law in the United States, so I spent a lot of time looking into American law degrees. I also studied on my own for two weeks and passed all six subjects of a higher-level legal examination in Taiwan, which is called 法务类高等检定考试. Two of my roommates in the United States were National Taiwan University Law graduate students and pursuing SJD at Wisconsin-Madison. My friends, Attorney Jiang Dienxiang, Tong Wenxun, they both have American JD degrees.
Okay, now a PhD stands for doctor of philosophy. That doesn't mean everyone with a PhD studies philosophy. You can earn a PhD in electronic engineering, journalism, music, and many other fields or law. Oh yeah, but they call it SJD or JSD or PhD of law, some universities offer that. Oh yeah, most still follow SJD or JSD because they think themselves are different from the PhD. So as the doctor of business administration, they use DBA.
All right, let's go back to the JD. Some professional fields use different degree names, such as MD, the doctor of medicine. Law has the JD, the Juris Doctor. These degrees focus more on professional training and practices, so their requirements differ from those of a research PhD. But doctor is still right there in the degree name.
All right, there is one thing Stan says that I agree with. In the United States, people with JDs generally don't go around calling themselves doctor. I totally agree. I have a PhD and I don't introduce myself to everyone saying, hey, I'm Dr. Peng either, but I have a choice to use that title if I should, if I can. All right, think about Taiwanese pastries, there's no sun inside the sun cake, nobody says we have to rename it. There is no wife inside a wife cake, there is no wife in a wife cake. Though, if there were, I might buy a whole box. But, in this case, the full name of JD actually is still Juris Doctor. If it were simply a master's degree in law, or if it is not a doctor, why would it have a doctor in its name?
Why don't they call themselves a Master of Juris Master? Okay, so whether a degree… There is an LLM for Master… After JD, actually. We call it Master of Legal Idiot. That's what MLI refers to. Okay, whether a degree is a doctoral or not isn't decided by whether it requires a dissertation. It depends on the degree, the university awards. You can debate how much a particular degree is worth. But that's a different question from whether the degree is real or not.
The questions I have raised about Tsai Ing-wen's degree are not just about whether she has a dissertation or not. I have asked whether she registered, paid tuition, entered the doctoral program, and completed oral examinations. Those are the records I want to see. On September 28th, LSE responded publicly to the UK Information Commission Office on the registration and payment questions. I want people to look closely at that response.
As for Jiang Wan, as JD from the University of Pennsylvania, I think people seriously underestimate what it takes to get into and finish that program. Some say he found a shortcut by doing an LLM or another master's program first and then applying to the JD program. Maybe they would help him. Yes, it is true. But do you really think every other applicant to a top law school is too foolish to think of it? If it were an easy shortcut, everyone would use it.
I have discussed the value of UPenn's JD in more detail on The True Voice of Taiwan, my program, every night from 8pm to 10pm, so I won't repeat all of it here. If Jiang Wanan really changed the degree listed on his resume from J.D. to S.J.D. on the Xuanzi Gong Bao or whatever, I think he was being far too modest. If he had both degrees and could mention only one, if I had both degrees and I could mention only one, I would choose the J.D. instead of S.J.D.
Personally, I value that JD much more highly than NSJD program designed largely for the international legal scholars. If any senior scholars disagree, I would welcome you on True Voice of Taiwan. Let's sit down and debate it properly. So, let me end where I started. I would love it if a son cake really come with the son, if a wife cake came with a wife, preferably more than one. But whether it's inside the cake, the name of the degree is Juris Doctor. That's what the JD is. Thank you, Stan.
OK, can I rebuttal now? I have three minutes, right? So first of all let's start with laopo bing and with kaya bing just the same as wife cake and the son cake they don't have sons and they don't have wives so jd doesn't mean that you're a doctor unfortunately same thing you're not an academic doctor doctor it's not a research degree same thing the people who can use the word doctor by addressing themselves are doctors like medical.
And secondly, these are the PhDs, SJGs, people who do research and who contribute to science, to the development of science. Then let's talk about these academic credentials and shortcuts. I'm not talking about if JD is better or worse than an SJD degree. These are different degrees and they teach different things. SJDs, PhDs, they contribute to science.
And by calling yourself a doctor if you haven't done a scientific research it's a basically it's misrepresenting what your degree is at. There are if you look at the United States census people with doctorate degrees JD's are not counted as people with doctorate degrees. MD's are not counted as people with doctorate degrees.
If you look at ISCED, JD is level 7 just like a master's degree. Canada considers a JD degree as a bachelor's degree and even the United States used to call it a bachelor of law. Then talking about Taiwan, MD, medical doctor, it's translated as by the Ministry of Education 医学士, 医学士, not 医学博士, it's not being considered a doctorate degree.
And what I'm talking about is not if Yu Pan's JD is better than Yu Sir Orion's SJD, but these are different degrees and they teach different things, and customary people with JDs, they don't call themselves doctors, because they're not doctors, and it has a certain level of misrepresentation here, that's the thing about the degree itself, about the name of the degree itself.
And that even though if you had both an SJD degree and a JD degree you would have preferred a JD, that's up to you, but this is not what this degree stands for, it's not a doctorate degree, it's a professional doctorate, it's not a research doctorate, people don't address themselves as doctors, and people can be fined in some countries for addressing themselves as doctors, if they use the JD degree, that's why it's dishonest.
And whenever I'm talking about Mayor Jiang, I'm talking about dishonesty, it's always it's a gray area, okay there is a Boshi name in the Chinese translation, so should I be able to use it, but people kind of don't use it in America, but what if I just write it down, and what if people just don't notice it, but this is not how it works.
And talking about president's case, I think that there is one thing that I might agree with you, I think that President Tsai, she conducted a real research, her dissertation is available online on LSE's website and even on her Wikipedia page I didn'tI'll send you one. Your area is human rights, so you should read it. My area is human rights, and she has written her PhD in dumping and economic barriers, something like that. But now you have a very good friend, new friend me. I'm under human rights issue. I've seen the statement by the University of London, and I have seen the dissertation. It exists. But there is one thing I agree with you on, and I don't know what you think about such a statement. I think that criminal defamation laws should not be present in democratic countries, for example, all the defamation is being regulated by civil codes in most of the democracies, and in the United States, in Canada, in the United Kingdom, all the defamation related legal matters are a matter of civil law, not criminal law. So I don't think that even if you're liable for defamation that you should be, you should be hold liable under criminal, under the criminal, criminal case, it shouldn't be considered a criminal case. That that's my opinion, and I think that that criminal defamation law is a because the defamation law it was written in 1928, it was like early Republic of China, it was very, it's a very totalitarian piece of regulation. I actually was sued by Taiwan Plus under the criminal defamation law, it ended up with non-prosecuted, non-prosecutorial solution, whatever, but I don't think that this should be a part of the criminal case. Oh really? So Stan, are you okay? Is your passport okay with you?
Yeah, it's with me. It's non-prosecuted, prosecutorial. I'm not guilty, and the case didn't even go to court. But what I think is weird is that Taiwan's criminal code has that criminal defamation law. I don't think that that's a very democratic piece of legislation. Still, nevertheless, I think that your accusations against President Tsai, you have your right to do so. You have your freedom of speech, and you should also hold liable under the relevant regulations if they consider what you've done as wrong. But I think that President Tsai in 1980, she has done I know that there is a whole peer review process. I'm also a part of the British education system, I know how it works, and if the university agreed that she has done her research, I trust the university. The university agree? Are you sure? Yeah, yeah, yeah, absolutely. And I would like to even invite you to go with me together to LSE, to London School of Economics, and read her thesis together. I know London pretty well. Let's make a deal, let's make a deal. Okay, that's the range of flight to London, all right? And after our investigation, we both held a conference or, you know, a press conference. Sure, but I know that her thesis isn't used in the university right now, and there many people who go there to read it, so why not? Yeah, sure, let's go. Before this Christmas. Before this Christmas. Oh, maybe, yeah, like early December, yeah, sure, sure. Okay, good. Good. Thank you so much. My today's biggest harvest of today's show. Yeah, let's go. Okay, okay, this is my rebuttal. Let's go to the next topic. Would you like to switch to Chinese right now, or what do we do? Either way, or maybe I can, um, okay, how, how, how many, how, what time is it, and how much time we left?
Uh, it's 29 minutes since we started, so we have another 30 minutes if we cut all of that again. So okay, that's, um, okay, maybe we can either, okay, let's, let's switch Chinese, it's okay if you feel comfortable.
Thank you, I have spoken Hakka. Alright, so should you start now or should I? I just finished speaking, so it should be, it should be the next person's turn. I will yield the floor to you. That's fine, I'll just ask questions. Okay, that works, that works. Then allow me, I mean, I'll give the time to you, but please allow me to interrupt slightly at some point, so forgive my impoliteness, okay? OK, then I'll hand the time over to you. You can speak English or Chinese, it doesn't matter. Fine, I'll speak Chinese. Should we stick to the same topic? Or anything is fine. You can talk about politics, or, yes, it's fine to talk about the election, talk about politics, or you can ask me why, why I went from a 'Blue Bird' to a 'Red Bird,' I can answer all of that. Actually, regarding your shift in stance, I have been watching your show all along. In fact, I watch Blue, Green, White, and even Red—those CCP programs—I watch them all, because doing this kind of political analysis requires accepting perspectives from all sides. Alright, let me ask you about this: what was your mental journey like? Because you were originally a supporter of Taiwan's sovereignty, you also wanted to protect Taiwan, and I also know you are a Christian, and I also know that psychologically you are a libertarian. You are a person of free will, you support small government, you are someone who supports small government, supports strong national defense, supports the right to bear arms, supports all kinds of things—that is, someone who leans more towards our conservative stance. How could you feel that one can talk about 'martial virtue' (wude) with the CCP? I personally find this very surprising.
Alright, Stan, and all the 'Blue Birds'—I call you 'Blue Birds' without any derogatory meaning, it's quite affectionate, because I am also a 'Blue Bird' (qin-niao). 'Blue Bird' is good, because it also relates to being blocked by social media netizens, it has to do with that Qingdao East Road thing, people started writing 'Blue Bird' (qin-niao) to avoid being caught by the algorithm, so 'Blue Bird' is a good term, no problem. I am an old 'Blue Bird,' I am a 'Blue Bird.' I support Taiwan's democracy, I support Taiwan's freedom, I opposed the expansion of the Legislative Yuan's power; when everyone was protesting back then, I went to record it too. I filmed so many wonderful videos, everyone can go watch them, from the very beginning of the 'Blue Bird' movement to various protest activities. Yes, I think Stan, if you follow my show, you should know that two generations of my family have supported the 'Dangwai' movement. My father contributed money and effort, I campaigned for everyone in the DPP, including attending Tsai Ing-wen's inauguration. I didn't take a single cent; even when I flew to the U.S. or Japan, I paid for it myself to attend the UN annual meetings and the Taiwanese Association of America annual meetings. I traveled half the globe, didn't take a single cent from the overseas compatriots, bought my own plane tickets, held a microphone on the streets of Tokyo, shouting the name of Taiwan, all to bring Taiwan's name to the world, to prove that Taiwan should join the UN, to join the Tokyo Olympics in the name of Taiwan. My dream has not changed, from beginning to end it has not changed. Today, what I am talking to you all about is reality. You are still remaining in your dreams. My dream has not awakened, but I have seen the reality. In these five years that I have come to the United States, I have seen how the U.S. political circles treat China, how they treat Taiwan. I have had conversations of over an hour with more than three dozen senators and representatives, and officials from the State Department. Not a single person promised me they will fight for Taiwan, not even a single person, no, the answer is no, period.
And I started to think, what should I do? Should I wake up from this dream, or should I not wake up? Let me interrupt, which year? Which year did you discuss this topic? Just so that the Taiwanese audience can understand better. I came to the United States in 2022 and couldn't go back. During this time, because of my identity issue, since I became a stateless person—have you ever heard of a second person in this world who doesn't have any passport on them? Some people say I am a U.S. citizen, some people say I have something else. Sorry, my passport was crudely confiscated by the Taipei Economic and Cultural Office in San Francisco, and the validity of my passport is still current, I'm not talking about an expired one. But you are not stateless, you are not stateless, you can apply to the embassy for a document to travel back and forth to Taiwan, that's not called stateless, you still have your nationality, your Taiwanese nationality hasn't been revoked. State, are you kidding? Which airline would allow you to board without a passport, just using some embassy visa and a travel document? A travel document is enough, it doesn't have to be a passport. There are many people like that in the United States, this really is stateless people, and you can also apply for a travel document, but you can, this is a temporary passport, in the U.S. it's called an emergency passport, and Taiwan will also provide a related document, your nationality hasn't been revoked, I know this. Give me a break, Stan. Are you kidding me? I'm serious. I'm sorry, you can go to the embassy and apply for a document to return to Taiwan. Are you still a human right advocator?
I'm a human right scholar. Yeah, but there is a legal process for that. There is a legal process, and you can apply for it. Stan, if returning to Taiwan is permitted for me, just return my valid passport to me, why do you make me go get some sort of extra-added fairy? Second, you know that the U.S. allows so-called entry and exit, you can return to the U.S., but it doesn't guarantee you can go to other countries. Advanced Parole, this thing is called Advanced Parole. No, no, definitely not. Because I have already run my legs off for nearly three years, I've run to the Department of State, I've run to human rights groups, I've run to various units, saying I don't have a passport, what should I do? So Stan, this problem will only be understood the day when your passport is crudely confiscated, then you will know what a human right issue is. Its procedure is that you can first go to the embassy, which is TACO, meaning the Taiwan office, to apply for this document to travel back and forth to Taiwan, and then in Taiwan—my passport, Stan, it's not that in Taiwan you can apply for a passport, once you arrive in Taiwan, my passport is valid. Give me thousands of breaks, I didn't forge it, nor did I fabricate it, my passport is within its valid period. Let me ask you, Stan, if you give me 1,000 New Taiwan Dollars, and then I write an IOU saying Peng Wen-cheng owes Stan 1,000 dollars, and say 'take this to 7-Eleven to buy a Coke', would you agree?
Aren't these different issues? If your passport is revoked, especially for various reasons, it might be related to the law, because Taiwan is a democratic country. Taiwan also ranks very high in various organizations and is a society ruled by law. Taiwan is a democratic country, yes. Let me ask you, Stan, Taiwan is a democratic country, so what about those mass recalls, labeling journalists as CCP spies at every turn and throwing them into prison, and sentencing Ko Wen-je to 17 years without any evidence? How could there be no evidence? Well, let me ask you again, is that your evidence? Stan, let me ask you, the People's Republic of China, which you look down upon the most, their courts even have live broadcasts. Do Taiwan's courts allow live broadcasts? Do they? According to my impression of Taiwan's courts, they don't have live broadcasts. No, have they ever allowed it? The CCP can fabricate things; it's a small show in their legal system that cannot be compared to Taiwan's democratic procedures. Sometimes democratic procedures, or rather more traditional methods, are better. For example, Taiwan's vote-counting process is something every American envies, because there is no mail-in voting; you must count the votes out loud. Now, American conservatives are very impressed by Taiwan's election system. That's because they don't know me. Stan, let me ask you, when Tsai Ing-wen rigged the primary election against Lai Ching-te within the party, was that called an election? Do you have evidence that it was rigged? That's because you didn't watch 'True Voice of Taiwan' (Zhengjing Guanbuliao). When she was president, she took a so-called sampling frame—it's very simple—I'll take your fan group list, Stan, and hand it over to this, saying, 'Come, let's use this list for our party primary.' We seem to have gone off-topic. We were talking about passports, weren't we? No, no, no, no, we are talking about democracy now. Okay, back to passports. Taiwan is a democratic country. I'll return to passports. Let me ask you, Stan, have you heard in the United States, or in the history of the Republic of China, of a person whose passport was confiscated before a court hearing was even held, without any conviction? Have you ever heard of that? And Stan, have you ever heard of a person who was sued for defamation by the president, and then the president sealed all the relevant evidence until December 31, 2138? You understand the law; you should know that in any defense, can either side seal their own evidence and still win in court? Let me ask you again, Stan, today my case is a criminal defamation case. In a criminal defamation case, the defendant does not have to appear in court; this is a legal provision. Why must I appear in court? I had two lawyers present to represent me, and I requested to appear via video link. Yet, the judge, without giving any reason, directly issued a warrant for my arrest, claiming I did not appear. And Stan, let me ask you, do you know of any court in Taiwan that, without letting both sides agree on a date, directly tells you, 'Stan, you must appear in court on such and such a day'? Have you ever heard of that? I'll tell you about a second case. Right now, immediately, I am at home with my hands tied behind my back, waiting for anyone to come and arrest me. And I'll tell everyone one more thing. I'm saying something now that you might not have understood, Stan: the time they demanded I return for the hearing was not agreed upon by my lawyers, nor was it discussed. Have you ever heard of any court, civil or criminal, where both sides don't need to coordinate the time, and it's just directly mandated? And at that time, generally speaking, some courts will set the time directly; this is not illegal. And did you provide the relevant information about your representatives to the Taiwan court? Because they might not know who your lawyers are either, that's also...
What I want to tell Stan is that I am in the United States, and when we go to the UK, you can give it to me on the spot, no problem. And Stan, what I want to tell you is that I placed this book in the Library of Congress. But Professor Peng, hold on a second, didn't you just say that you don't have a passport right now? If you don't have a passport, how can you get to the UK? I have one now, I have one now, because because the Americans knew I was wrongfully accused, so they gave me a way, which I will tell you when we meet. They give you a travel document and defense parole, so you can return to—do you know I was invited to U.S. President Trump's inauguration? Do you know that Trump personally wrote a letter to me? This—this—I heard about this, but Trump writes letters to many people. My friends who are getting political asylum also received letters from Trump, it's no big deal. Then you can show me a handwritten letter from Trump, I can take my friend's, he fled from Hong Kong to the United States, and he has always done that kind of research, he has letters sent to him by Trump from the White House, and another good friend of mine, Gong Xiaoxia, also received White House letters, they all wrote letters to him. If I were someone talking nonsense defaming Tsai Ing-wen, do you think the Americans would care about me? They should have arrested me, right? So friends and family, basically they wouldn't, because overseas cases don't necessarily affect your status in the U.S., especially if it's defamation, in U.S. law there is no such thing as criminal defamation, they are all civil matters. So, look, you can—didn't you get the documents? Did anyone restrict your freedom? No, no, you can't put it that way. The way you put it is like saying, Stan, you were stabbed by someone, and then you were sent to the emergency room, and the doctor saved you and you say it's fine, I'm alive anyway so don't pursue it, right, okay. Stan, I want to tell you another thing, isn't this different? This is fundamentally the same, no. But look, I didn't originally want to talk about President Tsai's thesis part, now you're guessing it's human rights, Stan, I'm telling you, the thesis is over there, you can see it, Stan. What thesis is over there, what are you talking about, Stan? You go take a look, is that even called a thesis? And if you think this thesis is not good, this is something written over 30 years ago, you can also write a better one, academia is inherently about refuting one thing and then refuting another. Stan, you totally lost the respect I originally had for you, because without any research on this issue you are talking nonsense, and your nonsense—I have seen the press releases, and I have also seen the clarification documents from the University of London. So from now on, Stan, when you say these random things, I will no longer believe you, and I will no longer call you a Christian brother, because you have no understanding of this matter, and you lack empathy.
Stan, do you know that my 96-year-old mother passed away two years ago calling my name by her bedside, and I couldn't go back, do you know that? Again, I couldn't go back. I'm very sorry, this is very regrettable, and I also hope you can reunite with your family, but you said it's the Taiwan government that won't let you go back. My mother is a dead person, not family. Please accept my condolences. This shouldn't have happened; you should have been there with your own family. Is Taiwan a democratic country, Stan? Is it? Taiwan is a democratic country, Taiwan is a democratic country, Taiwan is a democracy, this is also beyond doubt, Professor Peng, this is also beyond doubt, and you can return to Taiwan. Currently, various units of the Taiwan government have also said that you can return to Taiwan. Then return my passport when I get back to Taiwan. When I return to Taiwan, can they give me a travel document, isn't that right? A travel document is not a passport, travel document, it's a travel document, no problem. I know many Americans who lose their passports abroad, they just apply for that emergency document, get that emergency passport, and they can go back. Are you encouraging me to lie? No, because if your passport was confiscated, if there was a reason, if you cannot get your regular passport, because under some conditions those things can be subject to some legal restrictions, then you can get... If the Ministry of Foreign Affairs wants me to return to Taiwan, shouldn't they return my passport and tell me to go back? How could they give my passport to... Maybe they are afraid that if they issue you a passport, you won't return to Taiwan, and you'll go somewhere else. Where would I go? Are there that many countries with visa-free access for Taiwan? Should I go to Poland to find you? You're welcome, you're welcome, I'll pick you up at the airport, sure, no problem. Forget it, I'll just meet you in the UK. That's fine too, both are good. I'm not joking with you, let's go to the UK today to investigate properly, hold a press conference, and let's clarify this matter. OK, let's go to LSE, let's go to that LSE issue. I've been to LSE, I've taken all the videos I made at the time, everyone I interviewed told me, 'No, there is no Tsai Ing-wen dissertation.' What you see today is her putting her notes together and submitting them in 2019. If you read it, you'll know. If you read the first three pages and you still believe that is a dissertation, Stan, I surrender to you, I really 'surrender' to you. But do you mean that LSE is such a... because I know you admire prestigious universities, last time you described UPenn, you felt that you welcomed every Einstein to come and study there. You really like prestigious universities, you really respect those prestigious universities. LSE conducts various research and is also an outstanding school. When my doctoral thesis was published, they also invited scholars from—because I studied at Sussex—I had my examining professor, he was from SOAS, he was also from the School of Oriental and African Studies at the University of London, because that field is somewhat related. And LSE must have also found external scholars to conduct a review and audit, and then provide opinions because they must... Right, you hit the point. After the oral defense, there must have been some corrections. Tsai Ing-wen had no advisor. Tsai Ing-wen said her oral defense date was on a Sunday. Do you believe that? Not necessarily, it depends on how the professor scheduled it. And on the day of her oral defense, she was still on a plane and hadn't arrived in the UK yet. Her entry and exit records show that she wasn't even in the UK. Have you actually researched this or not? I don't know what her oral defense was like at that time, but I don't think LSE would casually grant a doctoral degree to someone who didn't do research. Maybe there was no published thesis. Do you know how Gaddafi's son got his degree? Do you know how corrupt these high-level British officials are?
And Stan, are you then questioning the entire British education system? I cannot accept that. Britain is extremely rigorous. To some extent, I did. I do. To some extent, I think so, because they are all just like you, willing to believe, unwilling to face the truth. I told Stan, I published a book called Evils. I put the face of Tsai Ing-wen and the then-director of the London School of Economics, Minard Shafik, together on the cover of this English book. The English title is Evils. You can find this book in the Library of Congress in the United States, and you can find it in the British Library in the UK. They both collected it, and they even sent me a thank-you letter. You would think they are collecting a... your freedom of publication. No, you say that is a rumor, and with such a sensitive topic on it, do you think they would collect it? If you don't believe it, write a book and see if the British Library collects it or not. Second, regarding freedom of speech and freedom of publication, generally speaking, unless it's something like advocating terrorism, actually anything else can be published. So I deeply respect and honor your freedom of speech, and your investigation into Tsai Ing-wen's doctoral degree. What I am saying is the truth, what I want to recite is fact, I am speaking the truth. Is LSE's attitude and position not different? No, no, Stan, your argument has also been refuted, hasn't it? Stan, do you know what they said after 2020 and 2023? I wrote it all in my book, so your problem now is that you haven't engaged in any research at all regarding the issue of Tsai Ing-wen and the fake doctorate. So this is also my fault, because I didn't mail my book to you sooner, but I promise I will mail it to you immediately. You probably don't even know who I am, so our channel has also been around for a long time. Our channel has been operating and developing... I will immediately send a book to you. If you can present strong evidence after reading this book to prove that I am wrong, I will publicly apologize to you, I will publicly apologize to everyone in the world, I will publicly apologize to Tsai Ing-wen... I am reasonable, I like communication, you present your argument, it's great, I'll read it, and then I can respond... No. Stan, what I am telling you right now is not opinion, because opinion just like asshole, everybody got one. That's what the Polish guy said actually, Józef Piłsudski. I know. So, but very, very realistic, this is what our founding marshal said, the Polish independence hero. I hear the point. I love it. But look, Poland later became a communist country, right? So, isn't that different from what your founding marshal said? Occupied, forced? Did we have a choice to become a communist country? Were we occupied? Right, and then we were betrayed by the Democrats, we were betrayed by Franklin D. Roosevelt. I feel many people like Franklin D. Roosevelt, but I truly hate Franklin D. Roosevelt to the bone. He betrayed my country, and also prolonged Yalta history. What I am telling you right now is that the United States is betraying Taiwan. My feeling is exactly the same as yours. Those Roosevelts are right now on the political stage of the United States. Although I support Trump, I strongly support Trump, and I support Trump... I support the Republican Party. Yes, I also support the Republican Party because I like its traditional Christian values. This is something I cannot compromise on. But they have done many human rights issues that severely violated human rights, so this is something I find completely unacceptable. You look at things like the Uyghur Human Rights Policy Act, which was also passed by the Republican Party. Many things the Republican Party does are also breakthrough actions on human rights issues, such as targeting Cuba and targeting Venezuela. These are necessary measures. What I am talking to you about is the micro level, and you are talking to me about the macro level, so I have no objection to that either. I am at this place right now... excuse me, I went off script today because I am also a bit emotional. I apologize for my emotional expression. However, what I want to tell you is that this is the only time in the seven and a half years of hosting that I got angry on the show. At other times, no matter what people say to me or curse at my ancestors for generations, I just smile. Why? What I am defending is not Peng Wen-cheng's innocence, I am defending truth and values. You can think about it, if a doctoral degree can be messed around with like this, do Taiwanese children still need to study? What the hell am I resisting China to protect Taiwan for? So what I want to tell Stan is that today what we must jointly pursue is a value, not whether there is reason behind Peng Wen-cheng. If Peng Wen-cheng dies, dies, dies, it doesn't even matter.
You can't put it that way. It's not about whether you die or not; it's about whether the defamation charge holds. Since you haven't been sentenced yet, and my trial hasn't even started—I haven't even said a word in court yet—it's possible, sure. But I think I should pause this topic here and freeze it, otherwise we won't finish even if we talk until tomorrow morning. Alright, let's look at another topic. Let's just each keep our own positions. I promise you I will mail the book to you. I beg you, please take a look at the English parts, because all the evidence is in there, including the LSE, the UK's Information Commissioner's Office, and the UK's Tribunal Court. They have all made decisions, so it is absolutely not as you imagine that the London School of Economics has admitted it. No, a letter from the London School of Economics written internally says, 'The English Certificate is Clearly a Fake.' I put this letter on the cover of our book. So I believe that someone as upright and kind as you, Stan, a devout Christian, my dear brother, I believe that after you finish reading this letter and the entire book, you will change your position. At that time, we will have more consensus. Alright, let's switch this topic. Maybe you are interested in talking about—let's change the topic, right. You might be more interested in Taiwan's democracy, whether China is democratic, and why you, Peng Wenzheng, say... it doesn't matter, right? And your change of position. Today we are going to talk about Peng Wenzheng and Chiang Wan-an, the Mayor of Taipei. There's nothing much to say about Chiang Wan-an. I'll tell you again, if Chiang Wan-an is really JSD or SJD, then he... he is a JD, but if he really says he is SJD or JSD, I think that's just... it's on the official website of the 10th Legislative Yuan. Well, he is too humble, I can only say that, because a JD has a much higher gold content. I'm telling you the truth. I'm going to offend a lot of people who study SJD here. Let me tell you, SJD, haha, that's all for foreigners who can't really explain things clearly. It's that simple. If you're not convinced, come challenge me on the show. Huang Kuo-chang is the same; many people study this SJD. Let me tell you, the JD degree is one that about a third of American college students would want to pursue. And for a prestigious school like UPenn, of course, if your GPA isn't 3.9... let me tell you, a bachelor's degree in engineering, electronic engineering, has a higher gold content than a JD, because now those companies in Silicon Valley make more money. And electrical engineering, carpentry, these studies have high gold content and can make a lot of money. I'm talking about Social Science, okay? Social Science major students, most of them focused on JD program, because if you've got a degree of criminology, you know, how can you find a job? Puma got a tenure track, right? After he finished that research, the school gave him a lifetime offer directly. That's fake. That just means, Stan, you don't understand the American academic system at all. American tenure at least requires you to be an assistant professor for at least 10 years, and then you can get tenure. You can't get tenure as a professor on the track. Everyone, everyone, you get a tenure track, and after you finish 11 years, you become tenured? I said very precisely that it's tenure track. I understand what you mean, that some positions are tenure track, and some positions are not tenure track. Right, some are just general lecturers, and some are assistant professors, and they are future tenure tracks. Generally speaking, if you have a PhD, you have a PhD, you are qualified to be a tenure professor, so they will definitely offer you a tenure track. Basically, there is no problem, unless you have a JD, you have an LLM, you are not qualified for a tenure professor, so you may not have a tenure track offer. I think the difference is here. I agree with that, it's just a lecturer, right? Lecturer. If you are a JD, if you want to teach, you are a lecturer, so it is not a tenure track. Right, of course, I agree with this.
Well, next I am going to talk about Chiang Wan-an, which is actually very simple. Personally, my view is that a Juris Doctor—if you want to call yourself a doctor, it is a bit of a stretch, but the word is doctor anyway. Otherwise let me ask you, Stan, why not call it a Juris Master? Why is a Medical Doctor translated as a bachelor of medicine in Taiwan? No, no, that is because—and this is what I have to tell you—that is because Taiwan's medical system is different. The medical department in Taiwan is a 7-year undergraduate program, while an American Medical Doctor is after college, 4 years, yes, after college, and this JD is also like that. So because the educational qualifications are different, yes, so if you graduated from the National Taiwan University Medical Department and you say you are a National Taiwan University medical doctor, you will be beaten to death with sticks. But today if you are a JD from U-Pen and you say you are a doctor, others will say, oh, OK, OK, if you think you are a doctor, oh, OK, because Juris Doctor is a doctor. No, you'll be laughed at in the United States.
And you still cannot modify it on an official website, so aren't you misleading voters? Let me put it this way, when Tsai Ing-wen is convicted, are you willing to go throw eggs with me? Because Tsai Ing-wen registered her fake educational background in two terms of the election bulletin. If you are certain that this matter is—if convicted, OK, if convicted, if there is a verdict of course, there isn't one now, yes, I know, no need to rush, no need to rush, right? I am already prepared to stay here for 18 years and harrass him. Fine, that is your right, that is your freedom, and I also support your right and your freedom. And do you know that this UN Charter right of return is a right? So returning to Taiwan is my right, no one can deprive me of it, yet you arrested me, and Taiwan is not even a UN member. Once again, here you go again, right? So Taiwan is not a member, can we not respect human rights? It doesn't matter, human rights are not necessarily defined by UN regulations either. There are various relations between countries, I have the right to return, you can arrest me when I return to Taoyuan Airport, that is your administrative power, these are two different issues. But you cannot seize my passport, you can return, you can return, the passport I hold, Chinese Taipei, why do I need the right to return, what kind of return, right? Let me ask you first, go think about it, if it is revoked, it's unvalid, it's unvalid anymore. No, no, you completely haven't looked at Taiwan's laws. First, the crime of defamation, second, that court does not need a hearing, I don't need to appear in court, and I even told this judge, can you change the time, because at that time it was a pandemic, I said you postpone the time. Aren't we going to change the topic? You keep talking about your things, I talk about my things, let's change the topic, because this has already been talked about, and you keep talking about the same content. Let's change the topic, I think you are a very knowledgeable person, we can discuss Taiwan-US relations, we can discuss the Taipei mayoral election. That's great, that's great. Taiwan-Poland relations are also fine, Taiwan's relations with Poland are also fine, they have been very good recently, an industrial park of Taiwan is going to open in Wrocław, many, many Taiwanese people are coming to invest, yes. That is because of Stan's connections, yes, thank you. No, that has nothing to do with me, but I have met the Polish president, and also the former prime minister, they are both very supportive of Taiwan. First of all, on the international stage, in the Atlantic Council, when he was prime minister, he was the second most important figure. Basically the Polish prime minister and president are parallel, they are conservatives. Our Law and Justice Party's Mateusz Morawiecki, Morawiecki, he gave a speech in Washington DC at the Atlantic Council, saying that Taiwan is a sovereign and independent country. That's great, very good, a person who is very supportive of Taiwan. And then you go ask that Polish prime minister—meaning speaking out internationally—that if one day the CCP attacks Taiwan, Poland will definitely send troops. At that time I will fly, I will personally fly to Poland once, alright? I will personally go to him, arigatou gozaimasu. Ukraine was attacked, Poland didn't send troops either. Actually, a war to defend the country is the obligation of the people of that country, but Poland can help, right? The United States can also help, so is this just Lip Service? Providing intelligence.
I, Professor Peng, let me tell you, this is a collaboration between the Polish and American defense ministries. There is a close relationship and a consensus: if a war breaks out—for example, if Russia were to attack us—what would we do? First, we must strengthen our own army, because the army, the infantry, and such things are things we have to handle ourselves; that is the most critical part. And what about the US? The US says it will provide defense in terms of the air force, intelligence, and weaponry—these three things. So, Poland has now received the most advanced F-35s and so on. But Poland is also very clear now that the hardest work on the battlefield is something we have to do ourselves, so we are building an army of 300,000. Our defense budget has already reached 5% of our GDP. This is even higher than what Albridge Calbee—who is now the Deputy Secretary of Defense—originally requested. He also said that Poland is a 'Noble Exception' in all of Europe. We are a noble exception; we are a noble exception because we attach great importance to our own national defense. Actually, Taiwan is the same. If a war happens, Taiwan needs to protect itself, but allies will provide defense. These allies include Japan, the US, the Philippines, South Korea, and Poland. In terms of providing armaments, sanctioning the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and enabling Taiwan to have the capability to protect itself in this defensive war, we will definitely make every effort we can. What I fear most at the moment—and I just mentioned this to your assistant, who is very insightful and excellent; you are very good at cultivating talent, and those who follow you are all very thoughtful—is that I think this is a wonderful thing, and I truly admire your professionalism as a media figure. What I personally fear most is the 'Taiwan-centric theory.' If the Americans do not trust Taiwan, it is a bit like how the Biden administration looked down on Ukraine back then, thinking Ukraine wouldn't fight, wouldn't protect itself, and thinking Zelenskyy would withdraw, and that we should just prepare for the country to be carved up and destroyed. Little did they know that Ukraine would hold its ground. But if the US had provided enough armaments to protect Ukraine in 2022, instead of things like Germany providing helmets, perhaps this war wouldn't have lasted so long. Ukraine had chances for a successful counteroffensive, several times, such as when Prigozhin mutinied and the Russian army began to retreat in the summer of 2022. But the Biden administration was still hesitant at that time. I hope the US views Taiwan the same way it views Poland: as a key ally willing to protect itself. Because, of course, Americans will tell you that the US fears a repeat of the Vietnam War, feeling that this war is not their war and that they don't seem to be needed. However, I want the Americans to know that Taiwanese people will protect themselves, and that Taiwanese people stand in the same camp with the same values. Therefore, the US must believe in Taiwan and trust Taiwan. So, here, our analysis might be very different. You turn yourself into a porcupine, that is, 'Porcupine Diplomacy.' It's about libertarianism, right? What is the logo of the Libertarian Party? Is the Democratic Party a donkey? Is the Republican Party an elephant? Then what is the Libertarian Party? Is it a porcupine? Why a porcupine? Because it's prickly, right? 'Don't tread on me,' just like the Gadsden flag, like that rattlesnake—it's about not letting you... Do you know the difference between a porcupine and a suckling pig? A suckling pig roasted is called roast suckling pig, and a porcupine roasted is called roast porcupine. That's the difference; both get eaten. Try catching a porcupine first; you can't catch it, your face will be full of quills. You know, nowadays, the ones catching porcupines are drones, so only drones have quills; people don't have quills. I'm joking with you. Taiwan also needs to build its drone industry. This is, of course, drones, unmanned naval vessels—yes, yes, yes, strategically speaking, it is.
If you have the opportunity to come to San Francisco, I will pick you up at the airport, and then I will take you, and then I will accompany you to fly to Washington to meet some of my good friends. You can ask them. After you listen, I go to Washington three or four times a year. I also frequently interview many think tanks, members of Congress, etc. Next time, no problem, next time, no problem, you go to Washington, I will fly directly over to meet you. The two of us can combine our diplomatic friends together to do things for Taiwan. I am very happy to do this. After all, I am a native-born Taiwanese. The reason why I am talking to you today, why I am telling you today that we should talk about peaceful reunification and sit down to talk, is because I am fully aware of Taiwan's crisis. How I wish Taiwan could be a strong and powerful Eastern Switzerland, but I want to tell Stan, The reality is very, very, how should I say it, the body is very, the mouth is very, It's not as bleak as you think, I think bleak is the word that you were reaching out for, right? It's not bleak, It's pretty optimistic actually, Not really, I think I'm just realistic, Realistic, and what I must tell Stan is, did you watch the episode where I interviewed Cheng Li-wun? Yes, I think you, I watched it with a heavy heart, because this is not the Peng Wen-cheng I know. Well, it doesn't matter, I felt very sad watching it. Don't be sad, many people in the Green camp think this way, but after they listen to me, after I finish talking about my journey, they all say okay, I bless you, I understand your logic, and I also understand the evidence in your hands. Before I came to the United States, I was not such a person, and it is not because I was hunted down by Tsai Ing-wen and lost my job due to civil action that I turned blue or red. Absolutely not. Everyone can take a look at the battles I fought and the errands I ran for Taiwan in diplomacy in the past. I guarantee it is more than all of you who are scolding me in the comment section combined. You can ask those overseas compatriots who scold me whether I have ever taken a dime from them. I have never bowed down for any amount of money, nor have I served any political party, nor have I served the Nationalist Party. So what I want to tell Stan today is that I have seen some things that perhaps you haven't seen. Personally, I think that if Taiwan misses the opportunity for negotiation, we are probably going to have a face-to-face fight. The problem is, do you think the Taiwanese people are ready for war? I don't think so. Can Taiwan afford to fight? I don't think so. First, Taiwan is small; second, Taiwan is close to the Chinese mainland; third, the Chinese mainland is rising. Otherwise, the United States would not be so afraid of the rise of the Chinese mainland, whether economically, militarily, or in various other aspects.
And you know, Stan, I have come into contact with so many friends from all walks of life in mainland China here. I dare not say that everyone thinks the CCP has improved now, because many people still criticize the CCP, but I don't think anyone would disagree that from 1949 to 2026, the CCP went through the Three Red Banners, the Great Leap Forward, and the People's Communes, which threw the country into chaos and resulted in the worst human rights record in history. Yes, Chiang Kai-shek also killed hundreds of thousands of people, you might not remember, go look that up. I know, I think the Kuomintang (KMT) and the CCP are about the same, right? And now the DPP, add them all up. Well, let me look back, the DPP hasn't killed anyone. No, Stan, that's because it's not allowed now. You can't compare a Louis Vuitton bag from Paris to the foot-binding cloths of a Qing Dynasty granny; those are different times, OK? There was no DPP back then, of course there was no DPP, so you can't compare them. That's the fact. The DPP has never persecuted any ethnic group. No, then what do you want to compare? You want to compare the judiciary during the Ma Ying-jeou era with the judiciary under Tsai Ing-wen and Lai Ching-te? Let me tell you, Stan, if you watch my show, you must have seen how I roasted Ma Ying-jeou when he was in power. I roasted everything from Ma Ying-jeou's sexual orientation and his academic credentials to his entire family. Have people taken to the streets to protest against Lai Ching-te in droves, on Ketagalan Boulevard, shouting for him to step down and calling him all sorts of nasty names? No, no, you shouting for him to step down is your own business. I was criticizing him in the media. Was his mother's home harassed like that? Was it worse that he couldn't return to Taiwan when his mother passed away? Well, let me ask you, Stan, I hope you remember how I criticized Ma Ying-jeou when he was president. Did the KMT ever criticize me, confiscate my passport, or threaten me? Not a single time. I tell you, this is the truth. Hung Meng-kai, Mao Chia-ching, Hsu Chih-hsin—these spokespeople would all come to me privately and say, 'Brother Cheng, oh, don't be like this, this isn't actually like that.' That's how they communicate with the media. Do you know that my show 'Politics and Economics at Formosa TV' was shut down in a single day? As a human rights advocate, 90% of my show 'Politics and Economics at Formosa TV' was about the good things the DPP did. I only talked about a small part of the DPP, because of the Mega Financial Holding case. I believed that the 6.4 billion NTD loss in the Mega case should be accounted for to the public and couldn't be sealed away. Because of this, my show was shut down in one day. Has any other political commentary show ever been shut down in a single day in the history of the KMT? So what I want to tell you, Stan, is that you have to compare apples to apples. In the history of the KMT, you didn't even have the freedom to criticize the KMT, because during the era of the four major radio stations, everything had to be audited and censored. It was a time of extreme lack of freedom of speech. When I was an anchor at TTV, I knew very well how the KMT controlled things. But if you want to compare, as I just told you, you can't compare the foot-binding cloths of a Qing Dynasty granny to a Parisian LV. But this party is the same, this party has not changed. No, that's not the same, the people are completely different. We all told Professor Peng, we in Poland abolished that Communist Party, that Communist Party that violated human rights, but he didn't abolish the KMT, did he? The KMT still exists, and they haven't apologized. By what right do you abolish the White Terror? By what right do you abolish the KMT's 228 Massacre and the White Terror? Do you know there is a Communist Party in the United States? Do you know there is a Communist Party headquarters in New York? Right? As long as you don't incite violence, actually, the US has relevant anti-communist laws, should they be abolished? Are you in the US? You know that if you go and launch a parade praising the Nazis, it is protected, right? That is what democracy is. This should also be condemned, right? This freedom shouldn't exist either, because you shouldn't have the freedom to destroy freedom. Then, Stan, I have to say, because Communism and Nazism are both terrorist methods, yet you say you have this freedom, doesn't that mean something different? Right? Stan, let me tell you, the two of us should host a show together, and since both of our shows have many viewers, we could host it until December 31, 2049.
Very good, very great. I feel that chatting with you about these topics today has been very rewarding, and you are welcome to come and communicate with us again in the future. I think this is very good, this kind of collision—collision of opinions—is very great. And I also really like your show, and I really admire your spirit as a media person in pursuing the truth. Thank you also to Professor Peng for coming to our News today. Thank you, Stan. I thank you for your long-term dedication to Taiwan, I am deeply moved. Let's work hard together for Taiwan. I am often in the United States, and let's work hard together for Taiwan so that more people are willing to support Taiwan. I am willing, I am very willing, but I hope Taiwan becomes better, and I hope Taiwan aligns with values—value. Do not lose the value and only think about political power, but this value cannot be preserved under communist autocracy. We can change, Stan, be confident, be strong. Why do I make a show? Now some video clips from mainland China are willing to broadcast it, I am conveying my philosophy and values, and I hope that one day they can watch Politics and Economics Cannot Be Blocked (Zheng Jing Guan Bu Liao), which means cross-strait relations having more and more common values. And I want to tell Stan, mainland Chinese people in the United States are almost all watching Politics and Economics Cannot Be Blocked, because I am very clear about it, many of them told me to my face that they agree with my values, not my value of peaceful reunification, but my decades-long unchangeable effort for a so-called common human pursuit of values higher than political parties. I believe what Stan does is the same, except that the two of us have some small areas where we need to slightly adjust to each other. But I am even more willing to go with you to the London School of Economics in the UK to jointly discover the truth about Tsai Ing-wen's thesis, I am very looking forward to this day. I am also very looking forward to visiting some members of Congress with you in San Francisco, visiting some volunteers, no problem, related to what is important, no problem, let's work hard for Taiwan together, thank you, okay, thank you, thank you Professor Peng, okay, and I also strongly encourage everyone to subscribe to Politics and Economics Cannot Be Blocked, and good friends of Politics and Economics Cannot Be Blocked, because I know tomorrow this show will be on Professor Peng's side, and also come to subscribe to this show of Stan's called News Tough Guy (Xinwen Yingbangbang) right? News Tough Guy, yes, and I also welcome all of Stan's supporters and the Green camp's supporters to scold me as much as you can, don't use the three-character cursing because that's useless, and don't make personal attacks because that's useless. Scold me and debate with me as much as you can, and if you are willing to come on my show to debate with me, I am very welcoming. Very good, very great. Well, thank you, thank you Professor, thank you Stan, thank you, God bless you