Lack of Criticism of Oppression Shows Hypocrisy

[jbg]

These two articles, concerning China's continuing occupation of Tibet (link, excerpts below"), and the infamous Janjaweed of Sudan (link, excerpts below") should draw some notice on the part of the many well-intentioned supporters of the "Palestinians". After all, these are also indigenous "peoples" being stripped of lives, self-determination or worse.

EXCESSIVE QUOTING and CROSS-POSTING DELETED by moderator

Edited March 19, 2008 by jbg
deleted excessive quoting and cross-posted articles

[buffycat]

And the point of this double post is what???

As we see you have also posted this here.

Funny, you seem to be the only one who can run around here and cross post (without adding much intelligence of your own) and not get booted for it.

Where is Charles and his double edged ruler??

[jbg]

And the point of this double post is what???

As we see you have also posted this here.

Funny, you seem to be the only one who can run around here and cross post (without adding much intelligence of your own) and not get booted for it.

Where is Charles and his double edged ruler??

It was plain as day that no one was going to respond to the merits of the thread, so I posted some of the same links, with materially changed text, in response to another post. While the quoted links are the same, the interstitial text is very different.

What's the point of your point?

[DogOnPorch]

re: Darfur...Saw this short film by a former Marine turned "casualty counter"

To me, it's all just part of a bigger problem involving everyone's favorite phobia.

Red China...no surprises there. Been that way since Mao and his gang hid in the mountains while the Nationalists were fighting WW2 for them.

------------------------------------------------------

Illegitimis non carborundum.

---General Joe Stilwell

[xul]

I have never remembered any western politicians had ever pressed Israel to "talk" to Arafat just several days after Hamas mobs killed tens of Israeli civilians in the street.

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/...rest/index.html

He(British PM) said he pressed Wen(China Premier) for constraint toward Tibet and asked that China begin talking with the Dalai Lama.

"The premier told me that subject to two things the Dalai Lama has already said -- that he does not support the total independence of Tibet and that he renounces violence -- that he would be prepared to enter into dialogue with the Dalai Lama," Brown said.

It fanny to find the similarity between Arafat and Dalai Lama. Arafat alleged he disagreed Hamas' way to attact Israeli civilians, but he just refuse to renunciate with Hamas. Dalai lama alleged he disagreed violence, but he also refused to renunciate with his tribal mob "protesters".

PS: Let's eliminate those political "writers' " nonsense, both from China government and some Western organizations. We just adopt those Canadian tourists' witness:

Canadians caught in Tibet's violence

For 19-year-old John Kenwood of Victoria B.C., his worst Lhasa moment was witnessing a Chinese motorcyclist being pummelled unconscious by a mob hurling chunks of pavement as big as bricks.

......

Later, the real mayhem began when buses and motorcyclists were stopped and anything that had Chinese markings was targeted to be burned, smashed or looted.

Then the worst happened: a Chinese man on a smart-looking motorcycle was forced by stone throwers to come to a halt.

"He didn't seem to understand what was going on," said Kenwood. "He was wearing a gold helmet and he got off his bike and raised his arms. He didn't know what to do."

A mob of perhaps 15 men carrying what appeared to be two-metre long, silver poles began beating him. When he went down, they continued to beat and kick him.

"Then they took off his golden helmet and beat him with it.

Though I agree everyone have the rights to express his willing of independence on peaceful way, even if he is a lama who lives a in a temple in Canada and he thinks his temple have rights to independent because most lamas lived in this temple want independence for they disgust Canadian politician's anti-kids-brain-manipulating law and they are the majority residents in the temple's yard and they have different "cultrue" in this yard. but I also agree Canadian government have the rights to act against his temple to be a country except the majority of Canadian agree this temple being a country.

Edited March 20, 2008 by xul

[xul]

These two articles, concerning China's continuing occupation of Tibet (link, excerpts below")

But I think there is a definite difference between Arafat and Dalai Lama. No offence of any Israel supporters, Arafat did have a piece of UN resolution said that Palestine is a country but Dalai Lama didn't. He could hardly find any serious history books or maps to base Tibet was a country before communists ruled Tibet in 1950. This is why he alleged he would not seek for independence but his "protesters" failed to show world how they obeyed their "spirit leader's" williing by shouting independent slogan and pulling off China flag from building instead of their "country's" flag.

Edited March 20, 2008 by xul

[HisSelf]

First of all, and I am addressing the OP here, if you are interested in Tibet, why don't you start a thread about Tibet? Or Darfur?

To compare the Israeli/Palestinian conflict with what is going on in Tibet is really stretching it, Xul, but if you want to do so, you would have to take note of the fact that when the Tibetans declared themselves sovereign and independent in 1911, nobody recognized them, while Israel did get recognition when it did so in 1948. Even Kosovo has gotten recognition now. But then, Serbia didn't have any friends in the US (Oops NATO) administration.

It is important that the Chinese Qing dynasty set up the Dalai Lama as the spiritual and cultural ruler of Tibet back in the 1700s, but it is also important that the Tibetans do not want Chinese rule. Also of note is the fact that the Chinese have been busily moving large masses of CHinese nationals into Tibet over the past few decades in order to make it more Chinese.This is why Qiangba Puncog, the Chinese-installed governor of Tibet, has been talking about "racial harmony". Harmony is a code word with the Chinese. It means shut up and sit down or we'll kill you and send your mother a bill for the bullet.

Another matter of some importance is that part of the area that China claims as its own (as a part of the 'Autonomous Region of Tibet') is actually Arunachal Pradesh, which is currently within the borders of India. Those of you with an interest in China-India relations might want to investigate this little cul-de-sac of history.

Anyways, comparisons of the Middle East to Tibet are not particularly relevant, since Tibet has elements of both the Israeli and the Palestinian circumstance. Both are very thorny problems but one is a thistle while the other is a bramble.

[Oleg Bach]

First of all, and I am addressing the OP here, if you are interested in Tibet, why don't you start a thread about Tibet? Or Darfur?

To compare the Israeli/Palestinian conflict with what is going on in Tibet is really stretching it, Xul, but if you want to do so, you would have to take note of the fact that when the Tibetans declared themselves sovereign and independent in 1911, nobody recognized them, while Israel did get recognition when it did so in 1948. Even Kosovo has gotten recognition now. But then, Serbia didn't have any friends in the US (Oops NATO) administration.

It is important that the Chinese Qing dynasty set up the Dalai Lama as the spiritual and cultural ruler of Tibet back in the 1700s, but it is also important that the Tibetans do not want Chinese rule. Also of note is the fact that the Chinese have been busily moving large masses of CHinese nationals into Tibet over the past few decades in order to make it more Chinese.This is why Qiangba Puncog, the Chinese-installed governor of Tibet, has been talking about "racial harmony". Harmony is a code word with the Chinese. It means shut up and sit down or we'll kill you and send your mother a bill for the bullet.

Another matter of some importance is that part of the area that China claims as its own (as a part of the 'Autonomous Region of Tibet') is actually Arunachal Pradesh, which is currently within the borders of India. Those of you with an interest in China-India relations might want to investigate this little cul-de-sac of history.

Anyways, comparisons of the Middle East to Tibet are not particularly relevant, since Tibet has elements of both the Israeli and the Palestinian circumstance. Both are very thorny problems but one is a thistle while the other is a bramble.

What about the human sacrafice about to take place in Mexico...You know that money laundering thing..with the crying and pleading woman being tormented in a hell hole - while Harper and Bush and the other clown Fox...prepare to off the woman by allowing Mexican due process to take place...does no one understand that Mexico is corrupt and cruel - so is Washington and now the new member to the cult - Ottawa have joined the league of pan american uniounist sadistic savages...poor woman...the more she cries - the more powerful they fell..sick!

[HisSelf]

Boy these threads really do seem to wander don't they?

[jbg]

First of all, and I am addressing the OP here, if you are interested in Tibet, why don't you start a thread about Tibet? Or Darfur?

To compare the Israeli/Palestinian conflict with what is going on in Tibet is really stretching it, Xul, but if you want to do so, you would have to take note of the fact that when the Tibetans declared themselves sovereign and independent in 1911, nobody recognized them, while Israel did get recognition when it did so in 1948. Even Kosovo has gotten recognition now. But then, Serbia didn't have any friends in the US (Oops NATO) administration.

The point is that the UN has a fair number of committees devoted exclusively to Israel's alleged depradations against the "Palestinians", and even a special refugee committee, UNWRA, separate and apart from other UN refugee relief efforts. Virtually no attention is given to other world outrages. These include the above-referenced Dharfur situation and Tibet, and:

1. Rwanda-Burundi;
   
2. Zimbabwe;
   
3. Taliban's attack on the Buddhas;
   
4. Indonesian treatment of Chinese and Christians; and
   
5. Hausa-Ibo outrages in Nigeria.
   

I am not going to start a thread on each of these. I will take the liberty of pointing out, now and then, that Israel and the US come in for selective attention by the UN and mass media.

It is important that the Chinese Qing dynasty set up the Dalai Lama as the spiritual and cultural ruler of Tibet back in the 1700s, but it is also important that the Tibetans do not want Chinese rule. Also of note is the fact that the Chinese have been busily moving large masses of CHinese nationals into Tibet over the past few decades in order to make it more Chinese.This is why Qiangba Puncog, the Chinese-installed governor of Tibet, has been talking about "racial harmony". Harmony is a code word with the Chinese. It means shut up and sit down or we'll kill you and send your mother a bill for the bullet.

Your very interesting history illustrates my point beautifully. But why is Chinese treatment of Tibet an "internal matter" whereas Israel's treatment of "Palestinians" is not?

Anyways, comparisons of the Middle East to Tibet are not particularly relevant, since Tibet has elements of both the Israeli and the Palestinian circumstance. Both are very thorny problems but one is a thistle while the other is a bramble.

Why isn't it relevant? And why is Israel a "bramble"? Because it is a Western-style democracy and a civilized country? (See last article in opening post, about medical treatment of Arabs by Israel).

[HisSelf]

The point is that the UN has a fair number of committees devoted exclusively to Israel's alleged depradations against the "Palestinians", and even a special refugee committee, UNWRA, separate and apart from other UN refugee relief efforts. Virtually no attention is given to other world outrages. These include the above-referenced Dharfur situation and Tibet, and:

1. Rwanda-Burundi;
   
2. Zimbabwe;
   
3. Taliban's attack on the Buddhas;
   
4. Indonesian treatment of Chinese and Christians; and
   
5. Hausa-Ibo outrages in Nigeria.
   

I am not going to start a thread on each of these. I will take the liberty of pointing out, now and then, that Israel and the US come in for selective attention by the UN and mass media.

Your very interesting history illustrates my point beautifully. But why is Chinese treatment of Tibet an "internal matter" whereas Israel's treatment of "Palestinians" is not?

Why isn't it relevant? And why is Israel a "bramble"? Because it is a Western-style democracy and a civilized country? (See last article in opening post, about medical treatment of Arabs by Israel).

Do you really think UNWRA is only interested in the Middle East? And why do you see Israel as a Bramble? Brambles protect bunnies, no? Do you have some sort of thistle affiliation? Do you have a kilt? Can you play the pipes?

[xul]

First of all, and I am addressing the OP here, if you are interested in Tibet, why don't you start a thread about Tibet? Or Darfur?

To compare the Israeli/Palestinian conflict with what is going on in Tibet is really stretching it, Xul, but if you want to do so,

I think the thread is started by jbg. I think his question is why Canadian politicians, journalists or numbers of this forum blamed more for Israeli "occupancy" of Palestine but less for Chinese "occupancy" of Tibet. I just tried to compare the similarity between Palestinian leader and Dalai Lama, western medias so called Tibetan's "spirit leader", and the difference between two kinds of "occupancy". I don't think my response mainly deviated his thread.

you would have to take note of the fact that when the Tibetans declared themselves sovereign and independent in 1911, nobody recognized them, while Israel did get recognition when it did so in 1948. Even Kosovo has gotten recognition now. But then, Serbia didn't have any friends in the US (Oops NATO) administration.

Western countries did not do this for respecting Chinese point of view, but for two causes bellow:

1. If western countries recognized the demand of Tibet majory of independence, how would they treat their own problems? Would they prepare to recognize the demend of North American Indian? Would they recognize the demands of independent of those African, Arabian countries and India at that time?

2. If Tibet's independency was recognized, there was only one country would benefit from it. This country was British. But could people suppose that other western powers, such as French, German, America and Russia, would allow British monopolize all benefits of Tibet independency?

It is important that the Chinese Qing dynasty set up the Dalai Lama as the spiritual and cultural ruler of Tibet back in the 1700s, but it is also important that the Tibetans do not want Chinese rule.

This is ture. But I also doubt those North American Indian Tribes wanted to be ruled by British. I agree with you that the probem of Tibet is not similar as Palestine, but I think it more likes the problem of North American Indian. If North American Indian had had a country then like China when British came, I would agree that they have rights to ask all so-called Canadians or Americans leave. But unfortunately they did not have themselves country then, just like Tibetan in 1700s, they were just consisted of several tribes, so the occupancy became legal according international laws. As native people, they have rights to aks occupier respecting their tradition, religion and culture, but they have not rights to demand independency, I think.

Also of note is the fact that the Chinese have been busily moving large masses of CHinese nationals into Tibet over the past few decades in order to make it more Chinese.This is why Qiangba Puncog, the Chinese-installed governor of Tibet, has been talking about "racial harmony". Harmony is a code word with the Chinese. It means shut up and sit down or we'll kill you and send your mother a bill for the bullet.

Alas...another paradigm of Chinese brutalization . But I'm not blaming you and other westerners, it seems there are not many Chinese try to explain their view point to westerners.

By which ways that "Chinese have been busily moving large masses of Chinese nationals into Tibet."? Chinese government have not buildt any "Chinese settlements" in Tibet. There do have many Chinese lived in Tibet. But they belong to two cataloges:

1. Technicians, specialists and government officials who was sent to Tibet to help these tribe people to bulid and run modern facilities Chinese government built for them. According Tibet have millions of people, everyone would not doubt that Chinese government can found some one who are loyal them. They just could not find a lot of qualified one to do the job, and I also doubt Dalai Lama could find a lot of quilifed specialists to run these facilities if he took over Tibet. These specialists worked in Tibet for two or three years, and come back to their hometown.(no one wants live in Tibet, if he likes fresh air, immigrate Canada will be better.)

2. Those business men, usually are small shop owners, everyone can see them shop in TV in this Tibet riot. But every countries have these guys. Israel also allow Palestinian into Israel for job, that don't mean Israel government wants to use Islamic culture destroying Israeli culture.

Even Mao or any ancient emperors had never meant to destroy Tibetan culture and religion. If they meant this, I would not doubt that there were not western politicians, journalists, human rights activists, racial bully fans...to telephone them to stop them.

Comparing the fate of North American Indians, I think Chinese rulers did not treat Tibetans too bad than westerners' impression. The emperors did, as you have pointed out, asked them to kneel to them, but they did not rifle them, grab them best lands instead of Chinese immigrants and drive them into "Tibetan reservation" . If Chinese did this, I doubt there would have so many Lamas and mobs today for rioting.

Another matter of some importance is that part of the area that China claims as its own (as a part of the 'Autonomous Region of Tibet') is actually Arunachal Pradesh, which is currently within the borders of India. Those of you with an interest in China-India relations might want to investigate this little cul-de-sac of history.

From some Danish and Russian view point, North pole would belong to them---of course that does not mean Canadian would agree with them.

PS: I think most of my response above have been deviated from the thread jbg raised, but I could not response your opinion without the words what I said above. So I think some kind of stretch is necessary in some kind of discussion for offering background information to support people's point of view.

Edited March 21, 2008 by xul

[jbg]

Do you really think UNWRA is only interested in the Middle East?

UNWRA is a Middle East-only entity.

[Argus]

I have never remembered any western politicians had ever pressed Israel to "talk" to Arafat just several days after Hamas mobs killed tens of Israeli civilians in the street.

Hamas mobs don't generally kill people. Hamas is an organized terrorist entity. When it kills people it does so deliberately. And while Arafat refused to forswear violence, The Dalai Lamai has actually threatened to quit if the violence doesn't stop. You are insulting us when you try to compare the two. We are not that ignorant.

[Argus]

Do you really think UNWRA is only interested in the Middle East?

It has shown no evidence that it is interested in anything else.

[xul]

Hamas mobs don't generally kill people. Hamas is an organized terrorist entity. When it kills people it does so deliberately. And while Arafat refused to forswear violence, The Dalai Lamai has actually threatened to quit if the violence doesn't stop.

terrorism

The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.

I don't think those mobs in Tibet were "general" killing people. They did these for political "reason", didn't they?

You are insulting us when you try to compare the two. We are not that ignorant.

Biologists can compare a man with a dog for both of them have two eyes, one mouth and four limbs, etc. And some men such as terrorists might attack innocent people to relieve their anger like a mad dog.

Edited March 21, 2008 by xul

[Rue]

This is in response to XUL;

1.You sttaed; " I have never remembered any western politicians had ever pressed Israel to "talk" to Arafat just several days after Hamas mobs killed tens of Israeli civilians in the street."

Could it be you have a selective memory? Where have you been. The European Union and for that matter the United Nations have continuously since terrorism began in the Middle East blamed it on Israel and Israel's refusal to negotiate with terrorists and to this day continue to do so. Your selective memory of what the Eiropean Union and United Nations have been saying NOT TO MENTION China and the Soviety Union, sorry its hard to fathom.

2. You stated: :Its fanny to find the similarity between Arafat and Dalai Lama."

You again show a remarkable lack of cresdibility with due respect. Here let's try help you out a bit. The Dalai Lama has never stated violence is an acceptable means of political exprfession. The Dalai Lama unlike Arafat did not create his original power base smuggling heroin and hash-hish through Afghanistan and Iran through Lerbanon and Syria to Marseille, France, then making deals with the French government to bank his money in France and have the French look the other way as the heroin went on to New York City.

The Dalai never called on his people to wipe out all Chinese across the world and take over China like Arafat did with Jews, and the state of Israel.

The Dalai Lama didn't state to the Western Press one thing and to his own people something else.

When the Dalai Lama settled in India he did not try overthrow the Indian government or use it as a base for terror operations.

3.You stated; "Arafat alleged he disagreed Hamas' way to attact Israeli civilians..."

No, Arafat stated on numerous occassions that attacking civilians was a legitimate means of achieving political will. There are thousands of speeches and manifestoes he issued where he stated this. Where you have been is anyone's guess.

4. You stated; " Dalai lama alleged he disagreed violence, but he also refused to renunciate with his tribal mob "protesters".

Now one has to wonder if you are just selective with your memory or deliebrately disineguine. Just four days agaon the Dalai Lama denounced violence by his people and stated he would resign if the violence contined. Where you were I do not know. More to the point you seem like the Chinese government to be unable to tell the difference between people protesting in the streets and expressing their political desire for independence with terrorism. You equate protests by people in the streets with Hamas missile attacks or suicide bomb attacks.

Then again from what I can hear the Chinese government which you are obviously a shrill for, considers any expression of democracy and difference of opinion, terrorist and routinely tortures, and kills people for such displays. You think we all do not know the millions of were mass killed by Mao Tse Tung and the millions who have been continuously killed, tortured and left to die in your prisons not because of violence or terro9r but simply because they dared question Chinese goovernment policies in the open with words and peaceful demonstrations.

5. You stated; " Let's eliminate those political "writers' " nonsense, both from China government and some Western organizations.."

Excuse me in this country we are democratic and try not to murder or journalists...its called freedom of speech...

6. You stated; "Though I agree everyone have the rights to express his willing of independence on peaceful way"... now isn't that interesting since you just finished stating you want to eliminate people you disagree with.

7.You stated; "even if he is a lama who lives a in a temple in Canada and he thinks his temple have rights to independent because most lamas lived in this temple want independence for they disgust Canadian politician's anti-kids-brain-manipulating law "

Hmmm, you are the same person that just stated you think people have the right to their opinion but now refer to our laws which protect freedom of expression as " anti-kids brain manipulating laws".... hey now there's a concept our Charter of Rights is anti-kinds brain manipulation.

8. You stated; "and they are the majority residents in the temple's yard and they have different "cultrue" in this yard. but I also agree Canadian government have the rights to act against his temple to be a country except the majority of Canadian agree this temple being a country.."

Try this on. In Canada we don't go into people's temples and tell them to stop praying.

So how long you worked for the Chinese government in Canada? Do you even carry the little Red Book anymore or has that been replaced my a manual on predatory economic pricing and marketing strategies?

Hey XUL the lead paint toys, tire exporting, anti-freeze in the toothpaste, exploding extension cords, come on man, you want us to be your allies and cruss the Tibetans with you, at least have the decency when you flood our markets to sell us things that don't give us cancer and go boom.

Me I am now boycotting anything made in China until you behave.

Edited March 22, 2008 by Rue

[Rue]

XUL you stated:

"I don't think those mobs in Tibet were "general" killing people. They did these for political "reason", didn't they? Biologists can compare a man with a dog for both of them have two eyes, one mouth and four limbs, etc. And some men such as terrorists might attack innocent people to relieve their anger like a mad dog."

I think the greatest tragedy is that you come from a civilization that offered us Lao Tsu, Confucius, Taoist doctrine, and yet yor education prevented you from leaning it and simply brought you up to believe the government dictates, and everyone must obey and so you have no clue between the difference in freedom of expression and terrorism as reflected in your above comments.

Lao Tsu stated; " a mad man has no sense to be able to understand his pain, an angry man does..". COnfucious stated, " an oppressive man things uses anger as both a pretense and an excuse..an oppressed man expresses anger without pretense or excuse..".

A mad dog XUL, acts out not to relieve itself of anything-the action is involuntary. In your analogy you suggest the dog is mad yet is rational and so lashes out to relief anger. No XUL a genuinely mad dog isn't angry, it simply manifests involuntary actions. It's not angry. Its brain is possessed by a virus or bacteria, tumour, or is having a seizure or malfunction.

What you do is project your subjective opinions that since you disagree with others opinions, those others since they don't agree with you are insane. No they are not. They simply disagree with you. They are angry because you disrespect them and send in your army and secret police to insult their traditions, control their beliefs and physical movement, beat up and disrespect their learned elders and flood their country with your people in a deliberate exercise of ethnic cleansing.

Terrorism? Just where is it? Show me the suicide bombers, the missiles being shot into your country, the people disguised as civilians going into your country and killing innocent civilians....it doesn't exist and you know it.

Your attempts to suggest political disagreement of Tibetans expressed openly is terrorism is bullshit, pure bullshit and you know it. It is not the same.

Terrorism is when humans choose deliberately to use violence as a method to express political opinion. That violence is not just marching and talking out loud and protesting, it goes the next step and includes killing innocent people. Tibetans have not ever engaged in any terror campaigns.

Was their vandalism of property inappropriate, yes. Technically property vandalism is wrong just as assaulting anyone is wrong. But there is a huge difference between throwing yak meat through a window and engaging in suicide bombings and your attempt to equate the two as one and the same is not credible.

May I respectfully suggest you duck if someone throws Yak meat at your head and as COnfucius said; " A wise man knows which bedroom he belongs in if he wishes to remain free of projectiles."

You might want to go back and read some of your philosophers your regime censors from the masses.

Edited March 22, 2008 by Rue

[xul]

This is in response to XUL;

1.You sttaed; " I have never remembered any western politicians had ever pressed Israel to "talk" to Arafat just several days after Hamas mobs killed tens of Israeli civilians in the street."

Could it be you have a selective memory? Where have you been. The European Union and for that matter the United Nations have continuously since terrorism began in the Middle East blamed it on Israel and Israel's refusal to negotiate with terrorists and to this day continue to do so. Your selective memory of what the Eiropean Union and United Nations have been saying NOT TO MENTION China and the Soviety Union, sorry its hard to fathom.

Exactly, I have never remembered western politicians had ever telephoned Israeli leader to pressed him to "talk" to Arafat just several days after Hamas mobs killed tens of Israeli civilians in the street. Of course, Russia and China leaders have never did this too.

I think it is too rude and cruel to victim.

The Dalai Lama has never stated violence is an acceptable means of political exprfession. The Dalai Lama unlike Arafat did not create his original power base smuggling heroin and hash-hish through Afghanistan and Iran through Lerbanon and Syria to Marseille, France, then making deals with the French government to bank his money in France and have the French look the other way as the heroin went on to New York City.

You should pay little attention to western media so-called "uprising" in 1959, Dalai Lama fleed to India at that time. You should not suppose these rebels were unarmed to act against Mao.

Behind Dalai Lama's holy cloak

The Dalai never called on his people to wipe out all Chinese across the world and take over China like Arafat did with Jews, and the state of Israel.

If Israel had one billion people and was as big as China and Arabian was only 3 million, I doubt there would be any Arabian dare to say wiping out all Israeli except he don't care others think he is an idiot.

The Dalai Lama didn't state to the Western Press one thing and to his own people something else.

By which way could you know these?

When the Dalai Lama settled in India he did not try overthrow the Indian government or use it as a base for terror operations.

LoL. I have never heard of any refugees in Canada trying to overthrow Canada government.

3.You stated; "Arafat alleged he disagreed Hamas' way to attact Israeli civilians..."

No, Arafat stated on numerous occassions that attacking civilians was a legitimate means of achieving political will. There are thousands of speeches and manifestoes he issued where he stated this. Where you have been is anyone's guess.

4. You stated; " Dalai lama alleged he disagreed violence, but he also refused to renunciate with his tribal mob "protesters".

Israel, Palestinians agree to end violence

I have almost forgotten Arafat has also gotten a Nobel Peace Prize just like Dalai Lama. The name of this Prize seems not fit to those guys who openly insists in killing. Like Dalai Lama, he just "powerless" to stop killing, according to them states.

Now one has to wonder if you are just selective with your memory or deliebrately disineguine. Just four days agaon the Dalai Lama denounced violence by his people and stated he would resign if the violence contined. Where you were I do not know. More to the point you seem like the Chinese government to be unable to tell the difference between people protesting in the streets and expressing their political desire for independence with terrorism. You equate protests by people in the streets with Hamas missile attacks or suicide bomb attacks.

If China government hired some mobs to gundown every pretestors in Tibet, then orally denounced mobs but said they were just "powerless" to stop mobs, would you think Dalai Lama needs "talk" to this powerless one?

Then again from what I can hear the Chinese government which you are obviously a shrill for, considers any expression of democracy and difference of opinion, terrorist and routinely tortures, and kills people for such displays. You think we all do not know the millions of were mass killed by Mao Tse Tung and the millions who have been continuously killed, tortured and left to die in your prisons not because of violence or terro9r but simply because they dared question Chinese goovernment policies in the open with words and peaceful demonstrations.

I don't know how many people got killed in Mao's time just as I don't know how many American Indian got killed by "your" Immigrants.----LOL, I have not owed any prisons and you have never killed any Indians. This age has gone. Of couse everyone know China government banned any open protests but that dose not mean that all protestors are correct and honest.

5. You stated; " Let's eliminate those political "writers' " nonsense, both from China government and some Western organizations.."

Excuse me in this country we are democratic and try not to murder or journalists...its called freedom of speech...

6. You stated; "Though I agree everyone have the rights to express his willing of independence on peaceful way"... now isn't that interesting since you just finished stating you want to eliminate people you disagree with.

If you think all western journalists are fair-minded just for western countries are democratic, I think you must be too naive. If democracy could guarantee newspapers' justness, Canada would only need one newspapers. Perhaps Canada would only need one political party if democracy could also guarantee the justness of politicians.

7.You stated; "even if he is a lama who lives a in a temple in Canada and he thinks his temple have rights to independent because most lamas lived in this temple want independence for they disgust Canadian politician's anti-kids-brain-manipulating law "

Hmmm, you are the same person that just stated you think people have the right to their opinion but now refer to our laws which protect freedom of expression as " anti-kids brain manipulating laws".... hey now there's a concept our Charter of Rights is anti-kinds brain manipulation.

I think you didn't know how Lamas in Tibet was made by kid-brain-manipulators. I have visited several Lama temples for tour. Most Lama comes from those poor tribe families, their illiterate parents donate one their teenager children to temple, for they believe buddhas will reward them in afterlife. These kids was enclosed in darksome temples. Their day-to-day work only is to listen a senior clergy's buddhism lectures and worship their living buddha.

It is too cruel to this kids for they have never had themself choice before they become adults and have their idea of their life. I have no doubt if Tibet is a Canadian province this kind of kid-manipulating will be banned. I also have no doubt if China banned this kind of things in Tibet, it would be a sin of "destroying Tibet culture".

8. You stated; "and they are the majority residents in the temple's yard and they have different "cultrue" in this yard. but I also agree Canadian government have the rights to act against his temple to be a country except the majority of Canadian agree this temple being a country.."

Try this on. In Canada we don't go into people's temples and tell them to stop praying.

So how long you worked for the Chinese government in Canada? Do you even carry the little Red Book anymore or has that been replaced my a manual on predatory economic pricing and marketing strategies?

Allowing them pray in their temple is not equivalence recognizing them as a country.

Hey XUL the lead paint toys, tire exporting, anti-freeze in the toothpaste, exploding extension cords, come on man, you want us to be your allies and cruss the Tibetans with you, at least have the decency when you flood our markets to sell us things that don't give us cancer and go boom.

I'm not aware what you said was relative to this thread.

Me I am now boycotting anything made in China until you behave.

Alas! If you told me you would boycotting me immigrating Canada, I might be behavior better.

Edited March 23, 2008 by xul

[jbg]

Lack of Criticism of Oppression Shows Hypocrisy - Continued:

Contrast the likely response to story ediorialized on in the New York Sun Lhasa Massacre (link to article) with the New York Times story concerning the "Jenin Massacre" (link to article). One wonders where the international hysteria will be about atrocities? Will there be broadcasts of people accusing the Chinese of putting mattresses over the heads of handicapped people to still their wails? Will there be a UN tribunal? Where will the campus and preacher radicals, such as Jeremiah Wright be on this latest outrage in China?

The Lhasa Massacre

New York Sun Editorial

March 21, 2008

A columnist who appears in the New York Post, Dale McFeatters, was out with a column yesterday on the Communist Chinese crackdown in Tibet, where, he reports, the Tibetan government says that 99 innocent protesters have been killed. Mr. McFeatters goes on to mention that this has prompted calls for a boycott of the Beijing Olympics, or at least the opening ceremony. And then he opines: "Barring some really heinous act by China, this would be a mistake."

It makes one wonder — if killing 99 innocent Tibetan protesters doesn't qualify as "really heinous," what does? How many protesters would have to be killed in Tibet for Mr. McFeatters to deem it "really heinous"? A hundred? A thousand? Would two thousand innocent protesters slain qualify as "heinous," but not reach the higher standard of "really heinous"?

*************

DEATH ON THE CAMPUS: JENIN; U.N. Report Rejects Claims Of a Massacre Of Refugees

By JAMES BENNET

Published: August 2, 2002

The United Nations issued a cautious report today dismissing as unsubstantiated Palestinian claims that 500 people were killed when Israeli forces invaded a refugee camp in the West Bank city of Jenin in April.

Stepping gingerly into a battle waged almost as fiercely in public relations as it was on the ground, the United Nations criticized both sides for putting Palestinian civilians at risk.

It suggested the Palestinian Authority was ''inducing turmoil, chaos, and instability,'' and it criticized the Israeli Army for inflicting ''severe hardships'' on Palestinian civilians through the use of curfews and other measures.

The United Nations study supported previously published accounts that said 52 Palestinians were killed in the Jenin refugee camp, along with 23 Israeli soldiers. In one of the study's equivocal judgments, it reported that ''up to half'' of the Palestinian dead ''may have been civilians.''

The United Nations report, attributed to Secretary General Kofi Annan, was largely based on published accounts and descriptions by humanitarian groups and other organizations, because Israel blocked the United Nations from conducting a first-hand inquiry unanimously sought by the Security Council. Israeli officials said they had feared an investigation by the United Nations would be biased.

*************

Edited March 24, 2008 by jbg

[Borg]

And the point of this double post is what???

As we see you have also posted this here.

Funny, you seem to be the only one who can run around here and cross post (without adding much intelligence of your own) and not get booted for it.

Where is Charles and his double edged ruler??

I am always amazed at the ability of some people to go to the past and pull this stuff up.

Do you folks sit on the edges of the cliff - overlooking the desert - just waiting to pounce?

I for one could care less if it has been posted 20 times.

If you do not want to answer - just pull the FIDO.

"F^%k It, Drive On"

Borg

[Borg]

You might want to go back and read some of your philosophers your regime censors from the masses.

Heck, just go and find out what news media and internet media is censored. Easy to control those who only get one side of the story - the side the government wants them to get.

Wasn't it a great chinese leader who stated categorically that political power comes from "the point of a gun"?

Says it all - nothing has changed and it will simply get worse.

I will be interested in seeing who goes to the olympics.

China will lose a great deal of face this year and they will not forgive for many generations if this goes the route I believe it may well go.

Hit them in the wallet and they will go back to 15 or more years ago - they are not ready nor are they willing to give up what they have gained to date.

China was barely ready for the 19'th centurey and certainly is not ready for the 21'st. Over all a bad crew that will be far worse as populations and needs grow. A far more serious threat than most yet realize.

Borg