09-02-2007, 02:34 PM
Chinese newspapers often use web forums as their sources. I've seen it happen many times already (might even be in one or two of the articles I posted in the 'DM quotes' thread). Of course, it's not reliable by any means, but most Chinese newspapers are quite tabloid in nature, especially the ones in Taiwan, Hong Kong and overseas. That being said, it's funny that Reuters decided to pick this one up.
I've actually met Shaolin's lawyer - attorney Huang (I kid you not - that's what he prefers to be called). It might not be the same guy now, but he was in a tough seat, trying to control Shaolin's name internationally. What is telling about this statement is that it does not designate an accuser beyond 'the monks'. The 'monks' would never make such a collective statement legally. If it were official, it would have Abbot Yongxin's name on it. As it stands, it could have originated from any of the 40,000 practitioners in Shaolin.
I saw this come up on the KFM forum. I'd be digging into it more, but I'm on vacation now. That's the official DOOMShaolin comment on this. HK, please carry on with your taunting of the PPFY.
I've actually met Shaolin's lawyer - attorney Huang (I kid you not - that's what he prefers to be called). It might not be the same guy now, but he was in a tough seat, trying to control Shaolin's name internationally. What is telling about this statement is that it does not designate an accuser beyond 'the monks'. The 'monks' would never make such a collective statement legally. If it were official, it would have Abbot Yongxin's name on it. As it stands, it could have originated from any of the 40,000 practitioners in Shaolin.
I saw this come up on the KFM forum. I'd be digging into it more, but I'm on vacation now. That's the official DOOMShaolin comment on this. HK, please carry on with your taunting of the PPFY.
Shadow boxing the apocalypse