Because here in the US we are allowed to actually learn about the Dalai Lama and not just believe what our oppressive governments demands us to believe. here is a link where you can learn about the term god-king. (if your country even lets you read it) http://buddhism.about.com/od/vajrayanabuddhism/a/dalailamarole.htm
Foreign reporters are allowed unrestricted access within the rest of China, and we've all witnessed first hand their "balanced and truthful" reporting there. I'd imagine that the likes of CNN and BBC (forget about Fox) would have a field day if they are allowed in Tibet. China supports slavery in Darfur? That's rich. One of the things the CCP re-iterates again and again is the separation of politics from economics. Not 100% possible, but there is more than enough truth in it. For example, relationships with Japan and the province of Taiwan hardly affected trade, something you conveniently chose to ignore. Perhaps the Chinese government would carry out a more active campaign of spreading equality to Darfur if it actually is a part of China, like say Tibet.
So you took your freedom to learn about Dalai into believing that a slave owner is peaceful? That's good to know. In China the government brainwashes people by withholding information. In the US people are so brainwashed that they don't even know they are being brainwashed. The effectiveness battle? US brainwashing wins by TKO.
China claiming the Dalai Lama masterminded the riots is not withholding information. It is a complete lie and you know it. Freedom > China
Yesterday you were claiming that it was ok because foreign reporters weren't SUPPOSED to be allowed in Tibet, then were rather embarrasingly interrupted when Otto posted the PRC constitution, then you claimed we shouldn't trust the PRC constitution. Now you''re saying we shouldnt' trust foreign reporters who another pro PRC poster is saying we should trust because they saw the evil demon tibetans first hand. My mind isn't complex enough to figure out all the twists and turns of that one. Thank you for illustrating how deeply lifting people out of slavery motivates Chinese intentions in Tibet.
Yeah, I find it incredible as well how many apparently well-educated and free-thinking people are willing to swallow whatever the media feeds them whole. The west does have a balanced media in general on most domestic issues, because there are different media outlets who represent different interest groups, and that's something China needs to learn from the west. But in terms of reporting on many international issues, any semblance of fairness and balance goes out the window. It's not a coincidence this country was just recently duped into a war.
We've had a weeks of completely contradictory reports by the Chinese official media, including that: 1. it's not really a protest it's just a few thugs in an isolated area doing looting, and 2. It's a giant conspiratorial plot by the Dalai Lama ranging over thousands of miles and FOUR provinces to upstage Indisputable dominion over Tibet. And yet the brainwash brigade simply goes "Tsk tsk, those mei guo's just don't understand our eastern values!" and then commiserats about the sad state of the Western media. Funny.
Says who? "Free Tibet" groups? The Chinese government put the usual spin and exaggerated, but they did not lie about Dalai and his "connections." We've gone straight to lying have we Sammy? Here was my post yesterday: Now where in my post do you see me claiming "it was ok because foreign reporters weren't SUPPOSED to be allowed in Tibet?" No really. I want to know. Caught with your pants down like CNN? Ottomaton embarrassed me? That's even funnier. His post did not even challenge my stance. As somewhat of a legalist, I have plenty of beef with the CCP not respecting its own constitution, but that's altogether another matter. The Constitution "guarantees" freedom media/speech, but NOWHERE does it, or the Chinese government claim anywhere it actually does in fact, HAVE freedom media/speech. In other words, to anybody who actually has basic reading comprehension, Ottomaton did not actually even challenge my position. So twist and turns? Hardly. Embarrassed? Quick, look in the mirror. No no no no, I'm no the idealist remember? Ottomaton is. I'm the realist. Mao did not go to Tibet with the initial intention of freeing the slaves (though he thought it surely wouldn't hurt). He went in to guarantee Chinese sovereignty over Chinese land. The slavery argument is merely an inconvenient truth to your ilk when you expectedly shout your highly pathetic "Free Tibet" slogan.
How many protesters to you see Sammy? Let's take your pro-Tibetan independence allies' words at face value, the high estimate. What is that, "thousands?" So "thousands" out of a population of 2.6 million is not "few?" 9999 out of a potential 2.6 million+ appears to be under 0.4%. I like how you used "thousands of miles" and "four provinces." With phrases like that, one would think that riots and open rebellion is going on. Then you see, wait, just Lhasa and tiny portions of Sichuan, Gansu and Qinghai. Hell, not even the entire Tibet is in open revolt.
It's simple people. Don't worry about boycotting. Go to the games, and kick all kinds of ass. Bring home a Gold Medal. That's how you stick it to people. Atleast, that is how I would.
Haha, that's pretty funny my friend. Since the "housands of miles and FOUR provinces" you emphasized does not lend supporting evidence that it's not premeditated or organized. If anything, it increases the possibility that it's somewhat organized, if different locations protested in about the same time. What's really funny though, is that some people would cite exile government's death count number, which was said to be collected through "affiliated" temples and wide ranges of "sources" within Tibet; then when it comes to being accused of plotting, they washes their hands and claim " no, no, we don't have any connections" with those temples within Tibet and neighboring provinces.
Not as funny as the fantasy of happy Tibetans living in grateful fealty to their gracious Elder Brother Chinese who have elevated them from poverty and brought them the gift of han chinese overrunning their country and making them minorities in their own land- or in short, the official story up until this month when it became too embarassing to be told any more. How's that one working out for you guys?
Best to not protest the Olympics, but do let the athletics unhurl Free Tibet flags after every victory lap. The whole nature of the Olymics is nationalism. Country competing against country. If it was purely about sports, then take down the flags and let everyone wear what they want. No, it's about glory for one's own country, and therefore, it's very nature is political. Therefore, I vote yes that we attend the Olympics, but definitely think we should show the Chinese a bit about freedom of speech. I hope all the world athletes make a statement during the opening ceremonies regarding Tibet - not just of one country, but the whole world. That would speak magnitudes.
Hmmm, although I don't find it funny, I have no problem acknowledge that there are haves and have-nots, those who benefited from the process and those who feel being left out of the process, just like in other parts of China/world. I don't condone the violence and laugh at some of the clinches, but I'm also of the opinion that the government should pay more attention to those have-nots. oh, yeah, nice redirecting BTW.
Just wondering Sammy, have you conjured up concrete evidence of "Han Chinese overrunning the Tibetans" yet? Because for some reason I find it kinda tough for 100,000 people (that is, if you believe Dharamsala) to overrun 2.6 million. But then again, Chinese people are very industrious, so maybe 4% of Chinese is equivalent to 50%+ population. You are saying that every one Han Chinese is worth 26 Tibetans right? Gee, I didn't know you had such high opinions of them.
How can you be so sure it is complete lie? Have you considered submitting your resume to His Holiness for a post in his government?
Several WESTERN journalists on the ground who witnessed the event said that there was no way the riots occurred without organization. Given that the Dalai Clique has always been looking for ways to stir up trouble in Tibet, who then becomes the prime suspect? If you have a problem with that logic, then explain to me why the US immediately blamed 9/11 on Al-Qaeda and UBL, who actually denied responsibility for the attacks? Oh by the way, where are those weapons of mass destruction you were looking for in Iraq? Your "freedom" is simply a codeword for American imperialism, and China will have none of it.
no because that means the government will deport Yao Ming and he wont be able to play for us anymore.
Its just a matter of time until china is a democratic country. You can't stop capitalism. It will eventually change them.
The day there is a democracy in China is the day the US flag flies over Tian'anmen. This day will never happen because the world will be destroyed in a hail of nuclear fire before we allow the Americans to take over our country. "Democracy" and "freedom" are merely codewords for Western imperialism.
