You seem to have a difficult time grasping many of the rhetorical devices of the English language. I would be glad provide lessons to you for a nominal fee so you can understand what people are saying. We can cover topics such as: irony sarcasm simile and metaphor allusion hyperbole alliteration ..and numerous other linguistic tools. I'm sure it could be of great benifit to you as these seem to cause you so much confusion.
you seem to have a rather difficult time understanding any of the good human qualities. I'd be glad to educate you on them but I'm afraid that you might not get the message anyway. However, for the sake of human society, let's start with the following: * honesty * fairness * modesty * patience * self-restraint I hope that you and some of your country men could all participate in my lessons, and hopefully your wonderful country could avoid being involved in tragedies such as going into wars on false pretenses or having your city attacked by disgruntled foreign nationals. Which lesson would you prefer me to start first?
I might be wrong but I think you just want to argue for arguments sake... so blacks in the US don't at all harbor some resentment towards whites for past injustices? Native Americans in the US are completely trustworthy of the Federal government? African nations aren't at all resentful towards their former colonial overlords? Are foreign governments supposed to agree with everything the Western powers demand? Past injustices are remembered. I dunno if you are at all familiar with Chinese history but a lot people there understandably are suspicious of Western motives. I'm not making a statement about Tibet in particular, but just saying that they do not howtow to US policies. It may help us in the West to better understand the basis for the low levels of anti-Western antipathy that China may harbor and how they might laugh at us when we (the former invaders who posted "NO DOGS AND CHINESE ALLOWED" signs in ShangHai) talk about human rights. Yes I know that this is "ancient" history but so is slavery in the US. Heck, China can bring forth a Golden Age in Tibet and Tibetans 200 years from now will still always harbor deep felt resentment (rightfully or wrongfully).
Cyber Voices on Tibet - A Search For Balance New America Media, News analysis, Xujun Eberlein, Posted: Mar 21, 2008 http://news.newamericamedia.org/news/view_article.html?article_id=0db406a8bd056cbbd2119742f01dba4a
CIA's Secret War in Tibet In a top secret and still little-known, decade-long 'war at the top of the world,' the CIA fostered, trained and supplied a tenacious Tibetian resistance force in its struggle against the Communist Chinese. By Joe Bageant http://www.historynet.com/magazines/military_history/3025986.html
If the Dalai Lama is as irrelevent or a flip flopper as you say then what does the PRC have to lose with negotiating with him? Why bother to continue to paint him as public enemy number one? The PRC could silence much of their foreign critics by simply negotiating with the Dalai Lama yet they go out of their way not to. That tells me that they don't consider him irrelevent and fear his influence more than they fear looking bad in foreign eyes even if that means it might tarnish the Olympics. So I guess that attempted hijacking by Uighars was just a random event or the continued high state of security in Xizang.
If you reread the post I was responding to that was the essentially what it was saying. As far as whether I have stated that the Han are exterminating Tibetans I don't recall ever making that statement. I will say for the record I don't believe the PRC is deliberately trying to exterminate the Tibetans physically but I will say that PRC policies are leading to a passive extermination of Tibetan culture and Tibetan society currently and that in the past there were active attempts by the PRC to wipe out Tibetan society and culture.
China should allow demonstrations in Tibet - U.N. http://in.reuters.com/article/southAsiaNews/idINIndia-32493820080314 UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour expressed concern about developments in Tibet on Friday and urged the Chinese government to allow protesters to demonstrate peacefully. "The high commissioner urges the government of China to allow demonstrators to exercise their right to freedom of expression and assembly, to refrain from any excessive use of force while maintaining order and to ensure that those arrested are not ill treated," Arbour's office said in a statement. Chinese intellectuals call for talks with Tibet By Richard Spencer in Beijing Last Updated: 1:58am GMT 24/03/2008 A group of Chinese writers, dissidents and lawyers has braved the threat of government retribution and the hostility of angry nationalists by calling for talks with the Dalai Lama and an end to the propaganda war over Tibet. The open letter, written by 29 leading intellectuals, said that the unrest showed that China's policy towards Tibet had failed. The Dalai Lama: Chinese intellectuals call for talks with Tibet The letter calls for open dialogue with the Dalai Lama It added that it was time to allow freedom of speech and religion, to invite the media and the United Nations human rights commission into the region and to hold direct dialogue with the Dalai Lama. It also singled out the increasingly strident response of both the government and ordinary Chinese, at home and abroad, for criticism. "The one-sided propaganda of the official Chinese media is having the effect of stirring up inter-ethnic animosity and aggravating an already tense situation," it said. "Adopting a posture of aggressive nationalism will only invite antipathy from the international community and harm China's international image." The likely response to the letter from the government can be judged by its fresh attacks on the Dalai Lama yesterday. advertisement People's Daily, the mouthpiece of the Communist Party, said the non-violent stance of "the Dalai clique" was "an outright lie from start to end". It added: "The Dalai Lama is scheming to take the Beijing Olympics hostage to force the Chinese government to make concessions to Tibet independence." The Dalai Lama yesterday rejected the accusation, saying he had "always supported" the Olympics taking place in China. The government regards the Tibet issue as among its most sensitive political issues, and even its fiercest domestic opponents normally steer clear. Media have been ordered to use only nationally approved reports on the unrest, which closely follow the government's position - even though this has led to the government's version of events emerging slowly and without clarity. Meanwhile internet postings critical of the government have been removed or blocked. The letter's signatories, who include some of the greatest thorns in Beijing's flesh, are taking a particularly severe risk. Ding Zilin, mother of Jiang Jielian who was killed during student unrest in 1989: Chinese intellectuals call for talks with Tibet Signatory: Ding Zilin, mother of Jiang Jielian who was killed by troops during student protests in 1989 Ding Zilin is the leader of the Mothers of Tiananmen, which represents the parents of those who died in the crackdown on student unrest in 1989. Teng Biao is a lawyer and part of the defence team for Hu Jia, a dissident who went on trial for subversion last week. Before the trial, Mr Teng was briefly abducted and threatened by unknown assailants The Olympics torch relay was also hit when a Thai environmental activist, Narisa Chakrabongse, who was to have taken part, said she was pulling out in protest. China's army of internet politicians has rallied round the government. Some have set up websites and posted films to expose what they see as Western media bias, drawing attention to photographs of police breaking up protests that appeared to be taken in Tibet but were, in fact, taken in Nepal. Some unleash angry obscenities, and say that China's critics are welcome to stay away from the Olympics. "If you don't want to come, don't!" says one. "If you don't want to participate, don't!" However, with the opposing view being censored, it is hard to tell to what extent such attitudes reflect popular opinion. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/03/24/wchina124.xml
there are a lot of hate towards those dissents from a lot of the people. i doubt the government is going to listen. i am not sure if negotiation is the best way to go. the priority right now is to get everything back to normal. talk or no talk, probably will be decided after the Olympics. there are some power struggle within the exile community as well as within Tibet with different schools. some are not loyal to Dalai.
they are only a extremely tiny number of Chinese people...could be numbered ...more of dissidents than intellectuals...i feel sympathy for them that their parents were killed in that students riot....however, i really feel disgust with their statements under such conditions....sort of like traitor
These are the usual suspects, regularly paraded out by the western media to criticise the Chinese government, on whatever issue of the moment. They not only have no influence with the government, they have also been totally discreditted in the eyes of the people.
Both of you, with all due respect, sound like Karl Rove, George W. Bush's master of spin, attacking those against the folly in Iraq. Accusing them of being "traitors" because they disagree with government policy. Attempting to demonize those in opposition to government policy by attacking their patriotism is the very essense of failed government policy. Nothing shows that failed policy more, in my opinion, than an assault on those who disagree with that policy by the use of extreme allegations orchestrated by the government. Instead of having a national discussion involving all sides on the issue, attack those who dare to disagree with the government by attacking their patriotism. One could argue that disagreeing with the government is an act of pariotism... the government is intended to serve the people and the country, not the people and the country becoming servants of the government, but that is what we are seeing in China. Rather than demonize those in China who disagree with government policy towards Tibet, you should have an open, wide-ranging dialogue on the region and move towards a long term solutution to Tibet that preserves Tibetan culture, provides autonomy, and continues China's sovereignty. Those are not, in my opinion, mutually exclusive, and would be of great benefit to China and the people of Tibet. In my opinion, of course. Impeach Bush and Send Him to Tibet to Report the News!
Read the piece by Economist correspondent, who actually was there when riot started, or the ripoff piece by NYT. The government response was delayed, more cautious than usual, if anything. Good job CNN and others "reporting" with bits of "evidence" and "sources" in weaving your usual theories.
^I love how people b**** about foreign news coverage of Tibet - when the PRC basically bans foreign journalists from reporting in Tibet. If they have nothing to hide, let them in. As of right now they're not letting anybody in. I wonder why...oh no I don't.
And do what? If Dalai really wanted to negotiate, he had the perfect opportunity under Hu Yaobang. We all know how that turned out. One of them is not on the politically scene any more. Any further attempt to negotiate with Dalai would only give him an aura of legitimacy, to be used when he flip flops again. Quite frankly Dalai is quite irrelevant. Know why? What he says or does doesn't affect China's policy in Tibet one bit. They can simply wait for him to die. I'm sure the CCP would love to host the Olympics and look good in the eyes of the west (a good start would be to become a good lapdog). But this isn't about saving face, it is realpolitik. The CCP is not going to worry about looking good when China's sovereignty is challenged. That's something I think a lot of people in the west should get really clear on. As supposed to, what? 100's of hijack attempts in the 50's? The bottom line is, situation in Xinjiang improve significantly since that period. You see to be of the opinion that negotiation and dialog solves everything. It doesn't. You negotiate when you actually have the chance to achieve something. Ah, but the devil's in the detail isn't it. China never actually claimed to have "free media" or "freedom of speech." So if "free" foreign media twist the truth for their purpose, why do you expect the Chinese not to? I know one thing the Chinese media won't do though. They try to hide certain events, they try to twist the truth, but they don't actually have a history of outright lying or they'd never hear the end of it. For "free media" of the west though, apparently anything is game.
I guess you don't even know the Constitution of your own country? source [rquoter] CONSTITUTION OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA ... CHAPTER II. THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF CITIZENS ... Article 35. Citizens of the People's Republic of China enjoy freedom of speech, of the press, of assembly, of association, of procession and of demonstration. [/rquoter]
