[Sunday Times]Tibetan monks beaten as police halt dissent

Yeah, that Dalai Lama with all his peace-loving and introspection is a real danger.

This stuff sucks.

 

Far more interested in this part. Could wnes or another one of our Chinese brethren elaborate on this part? Is sounds significant, but I am not sure what it means moving forward.

 

Excuse me, but the monks were painting their walls white!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If that isn't a danger I don't know what is.

 

Those monks are getting what they deserve.

 

What a non-issue. No one cares about Tibet in China, except for the fact that we're pumping plenty of investment money in there to sustain their economy. It's the West that makes a big deal out of nothing. It's entirely possible the British still want to establish a protectorate over Tibet, something they wanted badly in the 1950's and didn't get.

Besides, unruly anti-war protesters in the US suffer the consequences of being arrested and possibly injured if the resist, and nobody here seems to think anything is wrong with that.

 

With the exception of Tibetans. I know this because I have met them and they have told me such.

Kingcheetah says.....

 

Could you elaborate on this point? Just what exactly do you mean they are getting what they deserve? Monks celebrating someone getting an award deserve to be beaten up/jailed etc? :/

 

You're right Sam -- he made an excellent point that I completely agree with.

How could China not learn to love the Tibetans? Correct me if i'm wrong, but aren't there schools set up in communist China specifically for the purpose of teaching Tibetan love?

 

As others have noted this is an issue to Tibetans but it also is very much an issue to the PRC otherwise they would've just ignored the Dalai Lama being awared the Congressional Gold Medal. Instead though they have called in the US Ambassador to protest and complained that this is undermining relations between the US and PRC. Hardly a non-issue.

As for the British trying to establish a protectorate over Tibet that seems fairly far fetched. The British had the opportunity to do so in the first part of the 20th C. and didn't and did nothing to oppose the PRC move into Tibet in 1950. The British recognize the PRC borders and their is nothing to be gained by trying to establish a protectorate there.

I would be curious to hear more about the incident but painting the walls of a monastery white hardly seems to qualify as unruly. If the antiwar protestors in the US were painting their own property white as some sort of protest that wouldn't warrant a police incursion and in fact would be protected under the Constitution.

 

Monks shouldn't be causing trouble. They should respect that fact that the Chinese have liberated them and give thier daughter away as a sign of thanks.

To protest is disrespectful to the hand that feeds them, let the full hammer come down upon them.

 

Same ol' **** by the Times of London's sinophobe Jane Macartney, who is still revering the lost cause of her colonialist/imperialist ancestor George Macartney.

 

Eh, it's not far fetched given the history of Britain. It didn't act simply because it didn't have its way, as WWII took a heavy toll on Britain.

 

Peace-loving after decades of futile resistances, including violent armed uprising. Sure.

Can't blame CCP, DL the realpolitik "God-King" is hardly to be trusted.

It's well known DL calls himself half-Marxist ... LOL ... perhaps even to the dismay of his die hard supporters, DL just recently declared himself a Chinese, and Taiwan is part of China.

 

Hmm, not sure how to make this. As far as I understand, PRC's Constitution is not the business of the CCP Congress, but People's Congress.

 

The Brits still aren't happy that they were forced to give up HK to us, and they wanted Tibet in the past. So now they and their buddies the Americans are trying to stir up trouble there. Too bad we're too strong now for that ****, even though it's still annoying.

If you're going to mention the "Congressional Gold Medal", let me just give you a comparison. Not so long ago Ahmadinejad held a "Holocaust conference" debating whether the Holocaust happened. The Americans slammed it heavily. But does that means that Americans care for the history of the Holocaust to be reevaluated? Absolutely not. Nor did most of them even care about the issue. That's how it is about the Tibet issue in China. Most people don't care, the people that do care are on our side.

Talking to Tibetians in America about what they think of China is like asking the Cubans in Miami what they think of Castro. You'll get an extremely biased and false view of the situation.

 

I think you're wrong about most Americans caring about the holocaust. I think most Americans study the history of the holocaust, and numerous movies on the subject have been made, and been very successful seen by millions of Americans because they do care.

 

he was a slave owner. most of the tibetans that fled, are ruling class. they are all the rich people that owned slaves. of course, they are pissed off. all these poor people were happy. there are even footages of dalai meeting chairman mao. it seems that, he'll act like he is really nice. but who knows what he is really thinking. just an opinion...