Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
“What is the Secret Behind ‘Secret Tibet’?”
1 view
Skip to first unread message
Peter Terpstra
May 8, 2013, 4:03:05 PM5/8/13
to
“What is the Secret Behind ‘Secret Tibet’?”
By Woeser
Last month, CCTV 8 continuously broadcast the 46 episodes of “Secret Tibet”, a TV series produced under the guidance of high
officials involved with Tibet. The producer, Changlochen Tsewang Yonten confidently expressed that this series would not only
win the highest “government award”, the “Flying Goddess Award”, but will also be sold to foreign countries because its selling
point was “Tibetans talking about Tibet”.
On Weibo, the Chinese version of Twitter, on the other hand, at the same pace at which the TV series was aired – four episodes
per evening – fierce criticism flooded in by Tibetan audiences. The following comment by a Tibetan hits the target: “In this soap
opera, prayers for the elimination of obstacles was portrayed like an order given by Ramoche to aristocrats for implementation.
The demonized and distorted description of the usage of human skins and menstrual blood is once again presented on stage by
the ignorant script-writer to show the darkness and cruelness of the old Tibet. The whole plot is nothing more than the typical
cliche found in Chinese fast-food soap operas accompanied with some political propaganda. This is the so-called “Tibetans
talking about Tibet” propagated by the producer @TsewangYonten. You are so sophisticated, and sensible.
A different Tibetan wrote but did not finish his thoughts: “‘Secret Tibet’ in which Tibetans talk about Tibet: the director and
the screenwriter are not Tibetan, 80% of the main actors are not Tibetan; some of the very good local actors are not
involved…, if this ‘lack of love for the Plateau’ sets out to present Tibetan history, culture and customs, I am afraid that it will
only mislead even more people…”
There were also a few Han Chinese who left critical comments: “CCTV 8 is broadcasting ‘Secret Tibet’, it explains Tibetan
beliefs from a Han Chinese perspective, Han Chinese are frank; but I don’t know if the Tibetans from the land of Buddhism are
willing to accept the ideas of the Propaganda Department. Official reasons aside, ultimately the reason why they don’t let Tibet
become independent is because it is for their own advantage, there is no need to do any whitewashing, just respect people and
it’s ok.” “I watched this series by chance, but when I saw it I was embarrassed, the indiscriminately copied storyline tried to
conceal the hundreds of historical loopholes, the general tone of this documentary is obvious; if you watch too much your body
will heat up, you will get sick, so I advise people who are watching it to take medicine.”
So, how about comparing this to the red film classic “Serf”, an example of the demonisation of Tibet? I planned to keep some
evenings free to watch a few episodes of “Secret Tibet”, but I just couldn’t, in the end I always felt sick so I ended up only
intermittently watching some of them. And indeed, great historical incidences as well as small actions of common people were
all presented as if they were without mistake, as if they had not been tampered with, as if there were almost no errors at all.
“I would say it is even worse than ‘Serf’. The advisors of the documentary were all from Changlochen Tsewang Yonten’s family.
It is said that they normally showed a certain degree of awareness, so were they drawn into this by force or did they do it for
their own advantage? But then again, when Yin Fatang and the Propaganda Department join forces, what is there to expect?”
This is what the son of a family whose stories had been completely transformed by the documentary wrote to me.
I also wanted to join the discussion on Weibo. But the comment function of my Weibo account has already been blocked for the
past half a year, all I can do is read what other people write. But I still told my opinions to Changlochen Tsewang Yonten, as well
as to the director and screenplay writer Liu Debin, but none of them replied, perhaps they never saw my message, so let me
post it here:
This series was written with very clear intentions, it is a series full of distortions and deformations. Its attitude is actually very
arrogant, showing that the producers behind the scenes hardly understand real history, that they hardly understand the many
people who have passed away, the many contemporary witnesses and their descendants. The people that are being portrayed
were originally all part of Lhasa’s aristocracy. The producers humiliate Lhasa’s former aristocracy and its descendants in a
totally arrogant way.
I paid attention to some details: a Khenpo passes on the imperial edict of Reting Regent to some aristocrat, the first sentence
is: Prostrating in front of the Nanjing President, the natural reincarnation of Manjushri; the second sentence is: Prostrating in
front of Dorje Chang, the Dalai Lama. This single detail already suffices to see the entire picture. The series very much
resembles all those so-called art works about Tibet being produced by the Party, real history is being erased and distorted and
then the gaps are being filled with the content that they want to convey. It is just new wine in old bottles, it is all the same.
I believe that it was not really Changlochen Tsewang Yonten who invested money in “Secret Tibet”, it was the big boss who
simply had to use Changlochen’s name. Otherwise how could they claim that it is “Tibetans speaking about Tibet”? The United
Front Work Department’s drama group called “Yi Duo” had pretended to personify “Tibetans speak about Tibet” but they had
been uncovered so now they could only send Changlochen Tsewang Yonten, a descendent of the aristocracy, who was obviously
also generously rewarded.
A fairly well-known Chinese nationalist revealed some information on Weibo: “It is said that when ‘Secret Tibet’ was checked by
the censors, a local Tibetan cadre agitatedly said that us and the Tibetan separatists have not had any struggle with guns and
knives for so many years, but this documentary will give us knives and guns…” Yes, “Tibetans talking about Tibet”, those are
the guns and knives that the country’s Propaganda Department uses through the nationalist platform called CCTV to attack
people.
When faced with all the criticism and sarcasm by netizens, Changlochen Tsewang Yonten who normally actually likes to show off
on Weibo, completely avoided the internet. Liu Debin (online he is introduced as “associate Professor at the Literature
Department of the Beijing Film Institute, Postgraduate academic supervisor, famous editor”), on the contrary, was unable to
bear it. He stated that he was going to write a second part of “Secret Tibet”, he spat out: “I will definitely write it, make all
these contemptible scoundrels shouting out separatism disappear”. These political labels are scary! This political big-stick is
vicious!
What needs to be known is that over the past few years, above the heads of Tibetans (not only Tibetans but also Uyghurs,
Mongolians and other so-called “ethnic minorities”) has been hanging a large knife labelled “separatist”, and once it is dropped
it may mean death. “Separatist” is not just any kind of insignificant accusation. It means “overturning a regime”, “fighting for
independence” and “betrayal of one’s own country”. And the consequences of such actions are arrest, a prison sentence, even
complete disappearance or some time before, it would mean a public trial and being executed by firing squad. There are too
many such cases.
The founder of the Tibetan Communist Party, Phuntsog Wangyal, was in 1960 put into the most important political prison –
Qicheng Prison – for 18 years. He was believed to “possess local democratic beliefs” and to want to fight for “Tibetan
independence”. The 10th Panchen Lama was denounced by various general assemblies and also imprisoned in Qicheng Prison for
10 years, because he had written a “70,000 Character Petition” to Mao Zedong and was thus accused of “being against the
people, against socialism and was plotting an armed rebellion”.
For common Tibetan people, these kinds of accusations represent a crowning calamity. For minority cadres working within the
system, these accusations are phrased slightly less direct, like “someone entertains an ethnic consciousness”, but they still mean
that minority cadres have “bad luck”; only if they completely ignore their own conscience, can they really protect themselves. I
remember when I was working for the Tibetan Literary and Arts Circle, the Tibetan who was holding the post of the Party
Secretary of our group was unable to be promoted because it was said that he “entertained an ethnic consciousness”. I myself
was fired because I had written a collection of essays, in which I was accused of “making political errors”.
Hence, for many other people, this political big-stick is extremely effective, easy to operate and very beneficial. Phuntsog
Wangyal describes it like this: “eat non-separatist food, promote non-separatist officials, give out non-separatist rewards”. The
director of “Secret Tibet”, Liu Debin claims that he understands Tibet very well, that he has been to Tibet many times and thus
deeply penetrated Tibetan life, yet, he evidently uses this so-called understanding to fight against the “unwritten laws” of Tibet
and to develop a political big-stick especially designed for Tibetans.
For this I must really congratulate the director, by means of this kind of work of art, he did not only manage to find “hostile
external forces” for the Party, but is also ready to catch some “scoundrels who want to split the motherland”. Liu is also very
skilled at maintaining relationships, he is able to resort to an assorted assembly of “famous directors, literary critics and
Tibetologists” or other insiders who are ready to sing songs in praise of him. What may his future look like? He will not only be
sure to once again receive the “Flying Goddess Award” but he will probably also take over the throne of the President of the
Beijing Film Institute; it would not surprise me at all.
What does surprise me a little, however, is the young Tibetan people’s persistence and brilliance. Yesterday, for example, a few
Tibetan singers calling themselves “Sheep Droppings” dedicated their song “Respect” to the cast and crew of “Secret Tibet” on
the Chinese video website Youku; they rapped in Mandarin with occasional Tibetan and English additions to remind the director,
Mr. big-stick Liu: “…This isn’t about independence or separatism, this is about respect; We don’t need you to change history or
change the facts … Again and again you defame our people! You are just a clown, even if this is a grand conspiracy. Don’t
infringe on and slander Tibet’s thousands of years of history … Distorting history shows what you want, that you want a false
reality. Knowing the real history only reveals our people’s intrinsic quality. Kawachen’s people are not weeping snow lions. The
disgraceful show compiled by those without belief, where did you find these stories’ origins?”
Indeed, where did they find all this original material that allows them to simply revise history and lead a murderous crusade
against dissenting views? Within only one day, this rap song was “harmonised” while “Secret Tibet” that causes so much
disharmony is being praised highly.
February 5, 2013
http://highpeakspureearth.com/2013/what-is-the-secret-behind-secret-tibet-by-woeser/
By Woeser
Last month, CCTV 8 continuously broadcast the 46 episodes of “Secret Tibet”, a TV series produced under the guidance of high
officials involved with Tibet. The producer, Changlochen Tsewang Yonten confidently expressed that this series would not only
win the highest “government award”, the “Flying Goddess Award”, but will also be sold to foreign countries because its selling
point was “Tibetans talking about Tibet”.
On Weibo, the Chinese version of Twitter, on the other hand, at the same pace at which the TV series was aired – four episodes
per evening – fierce criticism flooded in by Tibetan audiences. The following comment by a Tibetan hits the target: “In this soap
opera, prayers for the elimination of obstacles was portrayed like an order given by Ramoche to aristocrats for implementation.
The demonized and distorted description of the usage of human skins and menstrual blood is once again presented on stage by
the ignorant script-writer to show the darkness and cruelness of the old Tibet. The whole plot is nothing more than the typical
cliche found in Chinese fast-food soap operas accompanied with some political propaganda. This is the so-called “Tibetans
talking about Tibet” propagated by the producer @TsewangYonten. You are so sophisticated, and sensible.
A different Tibetan wrote but did not finish his thoughts: “‘Secret Tibet’ in which Tibetans talk about Tibet: the director and
the screenwriter are not Tibetan, 80% of the main actors are not Tibetan; some of the very good local actors are not
involved…, if this ‘lack of love for the Plateau’ sets out to present Tibetan history, culture and customs, I am afraid that it will
only mislead even more people…”
There were also a few Han Chinese who left critical comments: “CCTV 8 is broadcasting ‘Secret Tibet’, it explains Tibetan
beliefs from a Han Chinese perspective, Han Chinese are frank; but I don’t know if the Tibetans from the land of Buddhism are
willing to accept the ideas of the Propaganda Department. Official reasons aside, ultimately the reason why they don’t let Tibet
become independent is because it is for their own advantage, there is no need to do any whitewashing, just respect people and
it’s ok.” “I watched this series by chance, but when I saw it I was embarrassed, the indiscriminately copied storyline tried to
conceal the hundreds of historical loopholes, the general tone of this documentary is obvious; if you watch too much your body
will heat up, you will get sick, so I advise people who are watching it to take medicine.”
So, how about comparing this to the red film classic “Serf”, an example of the demonisation of Tibet? I planned to keep some
evenings free to watch a few episodes of “Secret Tibet”, but I just couldn’t, in the end I always felt sick so I ended up only
intermittently watching some of them. And indeed, great historical incidences as well as small actions of common people were
all presented as if they were without mistake, as if they had not been tampered with, as if there were almost no errors at all.
“I would say it is even worse than ‘Serf’. The advisors of the documentary were all from Changlochen Tsewang Yonten’s family.
It is said that they normally showed a certain degree of awareness, so were they drawn into this by force or did they do it for
their own advantage? But then again, when Yin Fatang and the Propaganda Department join forces, what is there to expect?”
This is what the son of a family whose stories had been completely transformed by the documentary wrote to me.
I also wanted to join the discussion on Weibo. But the comment function of my Weibo account has already been blocked for the
past half a year, all I can do is read what other people write. But I still told my opinions to Changlochen Tsewang Yonten, as well
as to the director and screenplay writer Liu Debin, but none of them replied, perhaps they never saw my message, so let me
post it here:
This series was written with very clear intentions, it is a series full of distortions and deformations. Its attitude is actually very
arrogant, showing that the producers behind the scenes hardly understand real history, that they hardly understand the many
people who have passed away, the many contemporary witnesses and their descendants. The people that are being portrayed
were originally all part of Lhasa’s aristocracy. The producers humiliate Lhasa’s former aristocracy and its descendants in a
totally arrogant way.
I paid attention to some details: a Khenpo passes on the imperial edict of Reting Regent to some aristocrat, the first sentence
is: Prostrating in front of the Nanjing President, the natural reincarnation of Manjushri; the second sentence is: Prostrating in
front of Dorje Chang, the Dalai Lama. This single detail already suffices to see the entire picture. The series very much
resembles all those so-called art works about Tibet being produced by the Party, real history is being erased and distorted and
then the gaps are being filled with the content that they want to convey. It is just new wine in old bottles, it is all the same.
I believe that it was not really Changlochen Tsewang Yonten who invested money in “Secret Tibet”, it was the big boss who
simply had to use Changlochen’s name. Otherwise how could they claim that it is “Tibetans speaking about Tibet”? The United
Front Work Department’s drama group called “Yi Duo” had pretended to personify “Tibetans speak about Tibet” but they had
been uncovered so now they could only send Changlochen Tsewang Yonten, a descendent of the aristocracy, who was obviously
also generously rewarded.
A fairly well-known Chinese nationalist revealed some information on Weibo: “It is said that when ‘Secret Tibet’ was checked by
the censors, a local Tibetan cadre agitatedly said that us and the Tibetan separatists have not had any struggle with guns and
knives for so many years, but this documentary will give us knives and guns…” Yes, “Tibetans talking about Tibet”, those are
the guns and knives that the country’s Propaganda Department uses through the nationalist platform called CCTV to attack
people.
When faced with all the criticism and sarcasm by netizens, Changlochen Tsewang Yonten who normally actually likes to show off
on Weibo, completely avoided the internet. Liu Debin (online he is introduced as “associate Professor at the Literature
Department of the Beijing Film Institute, Postgraduate academic supervisor, famous editor”), on the contrary, was unable to
bear it. He stated that he was going to write a second part of “Secret Tibet”, he spat out: “I will definitely write it, make all
these contemptible scoundrels shouting out separatism disappear”. These political labels are scary! This political big-stick is
vicious!
What needs to be known is that over the past few years, above the heads of Tibetans (not only Tibetans but also Uyghurs,
Mongolians and other so-called “ethnic minorities”) has been hanging a large knife labelled “separatist”, and once it is dropped
it may mean death. “Separatist” is not just any kind of insignificant accusation. It means “overturning a regime”, “fighting for
independence” and “betrayal of one’s own country”. And the consequences of such actions are arrest, a prison sentence, even
complete disappearance or some time before, it would mean a public trial and being executed by firing squad. There are too
many such cases.
The founder of the Tibetan Communist Party, Phuntsog Wangyal, was in 1960 put into the most important political prison –
Qicheng Prison – for 18 years. He was believed to “possess local democratic beliefs” and to want to fight for “Tibetan
independence”. The 10th Panchen Lama was denounced by various general assemblies and also imprisoned in Qicheng Prison for
10 years, because he had written a “70,000 Character Petition” to Mao Zedong and was thus accused of “being against the
people, against socialism and was plotting an armed rebellion”.
For common Tibetan people, these kinds of accusations represent a crowning calamity. For minority cadres working within the
system, these accusations are phrased slightly less direct, like “someone entertains an ethnic consciousness”, but they still mean
that minority cadres have “bad luck”; only if they completely ignore their own conscience, can they really protect themselves. I
remember when I was working for the Tibetan Literary and Arts Circle, the Tibetan who was holding the post of the Party
Secretary of our group was unable to be promoted because it was said that he “entertained an ethnic consciousness”. I myself
was fired because I had written a collection of essays, in which I was accused of “making political errors”.
Hence, for many other people, this political big-stick is extremely effective, easy to operate and very beneficial. Phuntsog
Wangyal describes it like this: “eat non-separatist food, promote non-separatist officials, give out non-separatist rewards”. The
director of “Secret Tibet”, Liu Debin claims that he understands Tibet very well, that he has been to Tibet many times and thus
deeply penetrated Tibetan life, yet, he evidently uses this so-called understanding to fight against the “unwritten laws” of Tibet
and to develop a political big-stick especially designed for Tibetans.
For this I must really congratulate the director, by means of this kind of work of art, he did not only manage to find “hostile
external forces” for the Party, but is also ready to catch some “scoundrels who want to split the motherland”. Liu is also very
skilled at maintaining relationships, he is able to resort to an assorted assembly of “famous directors, literary critics and
Tibetologists” or other insiders who are ready to sing songs in praise of him. What may his future look like? He will not only be
sure to once again receive the “Flying Goddess Award” but he will probably also take over the throne of the President of the
Beijing Film Institute; it would not surprise me at all.
What does surprise me a little, however, is the young Tibetan people’s persistence and brilliance. Yesterday, for example, a few
Tibetan singers calling themselves “Sheep Droppings” dedicated their song “Respect” to the cast and crew of “Secret Tibet” on
the Chinese video website Youku; they rapped in Mandarin with occasional Tibetan and English additions to remind the director,
Mr. big-stick Liu: “…This isn’t about independence or separatism, this is about respect; We don’t need you to change history or
change the facts … Again and again you defame our people! You are just a clown, even if this is a grand conspiracy. Don’t
infringe on and slander Tibet’s thousands of years of history … Distorting history shows what you want, that you want a false
reality. Knowing the real history only reveals our people’s intrinsic quality. Kawachen’s people are not weeping snow lions. The
disgraceful show compiled by those without belief, where did you find these stories’ origins?”
Indeed, where did they find all this original material that allows them to simply revise history and lead a murderous crusade
against dissenting views? Within only one day, this rap song was “harmonised” while “Secret Tibet” that causes so much
disharmony is being praised highly.
February 5, 2013
http://highpeakspureearth.com/2013/what-is-the-secret-behind-secret-tibet-by-woeser/
rst9
May 8, 2013, 6:25:14 PM5/8/13
to
On May 8, 1:03 pm, Peter Terpstra <peter.terpst...@gmail.com> wrote:
> “What is the Secret Behind ‘Secret Tibet’?”
Western propaganda..
> “What is the Secret Behind ‘Secret Tibet’?”
lo yeeOn
May 9, 2013, 3:07:59 AM5/9/13
to
In article <3822638.IuC11lHnEj@Dharma>,
Peter Terpstra <peter.t...@gmail.com> wrote:
> blah, blah, ...
The original post was entitled:
What is the secret behind secret tibet?
It was a difficult piece to read. And no wonder, it was written by
Ms. Woeser, the treacherous Tibetan Chinese who lives in Beijing and
who was given a high profile award by the U.S. State Department around
the first week of March this year for being the voice of millions of
Tibetan women. And lo and behold, she first posted this article on
the 13th of Feburary this year:
>February 5, 2013
>
>http://highpeakspureearth.com/2013/what-is-the-secret-behind-secret-tibet-by-woeser/
So of course, she wrote something that had obviously pleased her
foreign masters very much and so they gave her a lot of much coveted
media attention by praising her as some kind of "poet" cum "hero".
So, maybe the Han Chinese still don't understand their Tibetan
brothers and sisters. But that kind of thing will take time to work
out. We just need to look at Hollywood's history of stereotyping
Far East Asians, particularly Chinese, as well as African Americans.
Woeser's goal was not in the interest of improving racial harmony in
China.
Her goal was obviously to serve her foreign masters.
And her goal to serve her foriegn masters is incompatible with the
welfare of the Tibetan Chinese, not to mention the societal harmony as
a whole.
In case the Han Chinese might have stereotyped the Tibetan Chinese,
we might ask where they might have gotten those bad ideas about the
Tibetans. But if you read Heinrich Harrer's Seven Years in Tibet and
remind yourself that he was Dalai Lama number 14's private tutor and
had observed the boy god-king and his kingdom close up, then you
might get clued in as to the origin of these stereotypes.
Harrer retold seeing the cruel punishment of a Tibetan caught and
convicted of stealing an expensive butter lamp. His penalty? First
they chopped off both of his hands in one sharp blow after they tied
them together in front of him. Then they took him away and threw him
off a precipice and he was never seen again. (The Roman Emperor
Tiberius was known to have his soldiers do that to convicted Romans
not far from his palatial residence on Capri, Italy --- at least the
throwing off a cliff part, not clear that he was as barbaric with the
hands. And of course Tiberius ruled 2,000 years before Dalai Lama
#14.)
Harrer also described the way the ruling class of Tibet (under the
Dalai Lama number 14) abused the laborers. And the inset paragraphs
below described his feeling and frustration with the Tibet he saw.
But first I shall try to explain why they did something that was so
unreasonable:
The Tibetan monks saw in the masses free human labor; so they chose to
do away with the wheel. Why? Harrer couldn't find one anywhere. My
analysis is this: by dehumanizing the masses, they got the beasts of
burden to believe more in the power of karma and the inviolability of
their rulers. The rulers saw the enormous advantage in keeping the
masses illiterate and superstitous, so they chose to cast out progress
and the mechanization of labor.
My analysis in fact finds support in the fact that the blacksmiths,
under the Lamas, were the very lowest class. They were forced to live
in the very outskirts of Lhasa. Why were they singled out for this
treatment? It could be because they had tools that could have been
used against their rulers. If they had to travel the largest distance
in order to get to the town center, any move they could make against
the lamas would take a time proportional to the distance. By then,
the royal guards would have enough time to stop its progress. The
monks could not tolerate any possible or potential threat.
So let's see how the ruling class dominated by the lamas under Da Lama
actively opposed the mechanization of labor and other forms of
progress:
Every year they put up high flagstaffs made of heavy tree trunks
fitted into one another. These are brought from distant places and
it is quite a task to carry them to Lhasa. It is managed in a very
primitive way, and my indignation was aroused when I saw, for the
first time, a prcession coming in. It reminded me of the Volga
boatmen. About twenty men drag each trunk which his attached to them
by a rope round their waists. They sing a monotonous air as they
trudge along, keeping step with one another. They sweat and pant,
but their foreman, who leads the singing, gives them no pause for
rest. This forced labor is in part a substitutte for taxation. The
carriers are picked up at villages on the road and dismissed when
they come to the next settlement. The monotonous airs to which they
drag their burden are said to distract their minds from the severity
of their task. I should have thought they would do better to save
their breath. The sort of fatalistic resignation with which they
lent themselve to this back-breaking toil always used to infuriate
me. As a product of our modern age, I could not understand why the
people of Tibet were so rigidly opposed to any form of progress.
There must obviously be some better means of transporting these
heavy burdens than by manhandling them. The Chinese invented and
used the wheel thousands of years ago. But the Tibetans will have
none of it, though its use would give an immense impulse to
transport and commerce and would raise the whole standard of living
throughout the country.
When later, I was engaged in irrigation works, I made various finds
which strengthened my belief that the Tibetans had known and used
the wheel many centuries ago. We uncovered hundreds of great blocks
of stones as big as wardrobes. These could not have been carried
save by mechanical means from the remote quarries where they had
been hewn. When my workmen wanted to carry such a block from one
place to another they had first to hew it into eight pieces.
So, not surprisingly, under the monks, Tibet's great days belonged to
the past. Harrer then wrote:
I became more and more convinced that Tibet's great days belonged to
the past. There is a stone obelisk dating from A.D. 763 which bears
witness to my theory. ...
So, Harrer's memoir does provide a little peek into the dark secrets
of the monk-dominated Tibet under Da Lama. It was a shameful history
that has justly been cast out so that all human beings can move forth
on an equal footing.
lo yeeOn
Peter Terpstra <peter.t...@gmail.com> wrote:
> blah, blah, ...
The original post was entitled:
What is the secret behind secret tibet?
It was a difficult piece to read. And no wonder, it was written by
Ms. Woeser, the treacherous Tibetan Chinese who lives in Beijing and
who was given a high profile award by the U.S. State Department around
the first week of March this year for being the voice of millions of
Tibetan women. And lo and behold, she first posted this article on
the 13th of Feburary this year:
>February 5, 2013
>
>http://highpeakspureearth.com/2013/what-is-the-secret-behind-secret-tibet-by-woeser/
foreign masters very much and so they gave her a lot of much coveted
media attention by praising her as some kind of "poet" cum "hero".
So, maybe the Han Chinese still don't understand their Tibetan
brothers and sisters. But that kind of thing will take time to work
out. We just need to look at Hollywood's history of stereotyping
Far East Asians, particularly Chinese, as well as African Americans.
Woeser's goal was not in the interest of improving racial harmony in
China.
Her goal was obviously to serve her foreign masters.
And her goal to serve her foriegn masters is incompatible with the
welfare of the Tibetan Chinese, not to mention the societal harmony as
a whole.
In case the Han Chinese might have stereotyped the Tibetan Chinese,
we might ask where they might have gotten those bad ideas about the
Tibetans. But if you read Heinrich Harrer's Seven Years in Tibet and
remind yourself that he was Dalai Lama number 14's private tutor and
had observed the boy god-king and his kingdom close up, then you
might get clued in as to the origin of these stereotypes.
Harrer retold seeing the cruel punishment of a Tibetan caught and
convicted of stealing an expensive butter lamp. His penalty? First
they chopped off both of his hands in one sharp blow after they tied
them together in front of him. Then they took him away and threw him
off a precipice and he was never seen again. (The Roman Emperor
Tiberius was known to have his soldiers do that to convicted Romans
not far from his palatial residence on Capri, Italy --- at least the
throwing off a cliff part, not clear that he was as barbaric with the
hands. And of course Tiberius ruled 2,000 years before Dalai Lama
#14.)
Harrer also described the way the ruling class of Tibet (under the
Dalai Lama number 14) abused the laborers. And the inset paragraphs
below described his feeling and frustration with the Tibet he saw.
But first I shall try to explain why they did something that was so
unreasonable:
The Tibetan monks saw in the masses free human labor; so they chose to
do away with the wheel. Why? Harrer couldn't find one anywhere. My
analysis is this: by dehumanizing the masses, they got the beasts of
burden to believe more in the power of karma and the inviolability of
their rulers. The rulers saw the enormous advantage in keeping the
masses illiterate and superstitous, so they chose to cast out progress
and the mechanization of labor.
My analysis in fact finds support in the fact that the blacksmiths,
under the Lamas, were the very lowest class. They were forced to live
in the very outskirts of Lhasa. Why were they singled out for this
treatment? It could be because they had tools that could have been
used against their rulers. If they had to travel the largest distance
in order to get to the town center, any move they could make against
the lamas would take a time proportional to the distance. By then,
the royal guards would have enough time to stop its progress. The
monks could not tolerate any possible or potential threat.
So let's see how the ruling class dominated by the lamas under Da Lama
actively opposed the mechanization of labor and other forms of
progress:
Every year they put up high flagstaffs made of heavy tree trunks
fitted into one another. These are brought from distant places and
it is quite a task to carry them to Lhasa. It is managed in a very
primitive way, and my indignation was aroused when I saw, for the
first time, a prcession coming in. It reminded me of the Volga
boatmen. About twenty men drag each trunk which his attached to them
by a rope round their waists. They sing a monotonous air as they
trudge along, keeping step with one another. They sweat and pant,
but their foreman, who leads the singing, gives them no pause for
rest. This forced labor is in part a substitutte for taxation. The
carriers are picked up at villages on the road and dismissed when
they come to the next settlement. The monotonous airs to which they
drag their burden are said to distract their minds from the severity
of their task. I should have thought they would do better to save
their breath. The sort of fatalistic resignation with which they
lent themselve to this back-breaking toil always used to infuriate
me. As a product of our modern age, I could not understand why the
people of Tibet were so rigidly opposed to any form of progress.
There must obviously be some better means of transporting these
heavy burdens than by manhandling them. The Chinese invented and
used the wheel thousands of years ago. But the Tibetans will have
none of it, though its use would give an immense impulse to
transport and commerce and would raise the whole standard of living
throughout the country.
When later, I was engaged in irrigation works, I made various finds
which strengthened my belief that the Tibetans had known and used
the wheel many centuries ago. We uncovered hundreds of great blocks
of stones as big as wardrobes. These could not have been carried
save by mechanical means from the remote quarries where they had
been hewn. When my workmen wanted to carry such a block from one
place to another they had first to hew it into eight pieces.
So, not surprisingly, under the monks, Tibet's great days belonged to
the past. Harrer then wrote:
I became more and more convinced that Tibet's great days belonged to
the past. There is a stone obelisk dating from A.D. 763 which bears
witness to my theory. ...
So, Harrer's memoir does provide a little peek into the dark secrets
of the monk-dominated Tibet under Da Lama. It was a shameful history
that has justly been cast out so that all human beings can move forth
on an equal footing.
lo yeeOn
Peter Terpstra
May 9, 2013, 4:10:10 AM5/9/13
to
lo yeeOn wrote:
> The Dark Ages in Tibet under the rule of the Lamas are thankfully gone
How credible is your CCP based information dear friend?
Don't you think there could be a complete world beyond the CCP line?
May all be well with you sir, Neljor
> The Dark Ages in Tibet under the rule of the Lamas are thankfully gone
How credible is your CCP based information dear friend?
Don't you think there could be a complete world beyond the CCP line?
May all be well with you sir, Neljor
lo yeeOn
May 9, 2013, 12:20:24 PM5/9/13
to
In article <2634436.q3m3n6JI2f@Dharma>,
consumption) was taken from the Seven Years in Tibet by Heinrich
Harrer, the same guy whose hairy leg fascinated the 14th Da Lai Lama
and to whom the boy king summoned in the middle of the night because
he couldn't sleep. (See the Hollywood movie of the same name for the
physical action between the two intimate "friends".)
Heinrich Harrer did not work for the CCP. He did not write his memoir
from any CCP information. He told it as he recalled having seen it
himself - firsthand.
>
>Don't you think there could be a complete world beyond the CCP line?
>
Of course, that's why I was quoting from Heinrich Harrer, Da Lama's
personal friend, confidante, and tutor. So, the information is
totally unimpeachable.
The question is: Why were the lamas so cruel?
Why is it that the monks as the dominant force of the ruling class
banned the use of wheel?
The fact that Da Lama's predecessor the Dalai Lama #13 had already had
three fancy automobiles brought in from the West 2 from - Britain and
1 from the US (2 Austin and 1 Olds) - makes it all the more astounding
that Heinrich Harrer was still seeing the Tibetan laborers hauling
huge trunks of downed trees for miles and miles by dragging like the
"Volga Boatmen" instead of wheels when he was there from 1944-1951.
In fact, Harrer went on to say that in fact he did find evidence that
wheel was a known technology in Tibet years ago when Potala was built
for the high lamas.
So, why did the Dalai Lamas treat their subjects so badly - as beasts
of burden?
Why did they have to cut off the thief's hands - both of them - before
their henchmen took him to the edge of precipice and threw him off.
Why are they so cruel?
Compassion? Where was compassion when Da Lama was the supreme ruler
of Tibet?
It's hard to see compassion when you read the "Seven Years of Tibet".
You, Neljor, should be ashamed of yourself for working to bring such a
corrupt form of government back to Tibet and for your mindless attacks
against the Chinese.
lo yeeOn
Subject: The Dark Ages in Tibet under the rule of the Lamas are
thankfully gone
Peter Terpstra <peter.t...@gmail.com> wrote:
>lo yeeOn wrote:
>
>> The Dark Ages in Tibet under the rule of the Lamas are thankfully gone
>
>How credible is your CCP based information dear friend?
The information I used (appended below again for your leisurely
>lo yeeOn wrote:
>
>> The Dark Ages in Tibet under the rule of the Lamas are thankfully gone
>
>How credible is your CCP based information dear friend?
consumption) was taken from the Seven Years in Tibet by Heinrich
Harrer, the same guy whose hairy leg fascinated the 14th Da Lai Lama
and to whom the boy king summoned in the middle of the night because
he couldn't sleep. (See the Hollywood movie of the same name for the
physical action between the two intimate "friends".)
Heinrich Harrer did not work for the CCP. He did not write his memoir
from any CCP information. He told it as he recalled having seen it
himself - firsthand.
>
>Don't you think there could be a complete world beyond the CCP line?
>
personal friend, confidante, and tutor. So, the information is
totally unimpeachable.
The question is: Why were the lamas so cruel?
Why is it that the monks as the dominant force of the ruling class
banned the use of wheel?
The fact that Da Lama's predecessor the Dalai Lama #13 had already had
three fancy automobiles brought in from the West 2 from - Britain and
1 from the US (2 Austin and 1 Olds) - makes it all the more astounding
that Heinrich Harrer was still seeing the Tibetan laborers hauling
huge trunks of downed trees for miles and miles by dragging like the
"Volga Boatmen" instead of wheels when he was there from 1944-1951.
In fact, Harrer went on to say that in fact he did find evidence that
wheel was a known technology in Tibet years ago when Potala was built
for the high lamas.
So, why did the Dalai Lamas treat their subjects so badly - as beasts
of burden?
Why did they have to cut off the thief's hands - both of them - before
their henchmen took him to the edge of precipice and threw him off.
Why are they so cruel?
Compassion? Where was compassion when Da Lama was the supreme ruler
of Tibet?
It's hard to see compassion when you read the "Seven Years of Tibet".
You, Neljor, should be ashamed of yourself for working to bring such a
corrupt form of government back to Tibet and for your mindless attacks
against the Chinese.
lo yeeOn
Subject: The Dark Ages in Tibet under the rule of the Lamas are
thankfully gone
rst9
May 9, 2013, 12:26:04 PM5/9/13
to
On May 9, 1:10 am, Peter Terpstra <peter.terpst...@gmail.com> wrote:
> lo yeeOn wrote:
> > The Dark Ages in Tibet under the rule of the Lamas are thankfully gone
>
> How credible is your CCP based information dear friend?
You, Peter the Dutch idiot, are certainly NOT credible.
> lo yeeOn wrote:
> > The Dark Ages in Tibet under the rule of the Lamas are thankfully gone
>
> How credible is your CCP based information dear friend?
You are nothing but a pawn and stew-pigeon to Uncle Sam.
>
> Don't you think there could be a complete world beyond the CCP line?
>
> May all be well with you sir, Neljor
lo yeeOn
May 9, 2013, 3:18:49 PM5/9/13
to
In article <2634436.q3m3n6JI2f@Dharma>,
Heinrich Harrer did not work for the CCP. He did not write his memoir
from any CCP information. He told it as he recalled having seen it
himself - firsthand.
>
But I was not quoting any CCP line. In fact I was consciously quoting
Herr Heinrich Harrer, Da Lama's personal friend, confidante, and tutor
- someone who could not have been quoting the CCP line. And hence the
information is totally unimpeachable.
Historically, the lamas of Tibet were extremely repressive and life
under their rule was plagued by fear and harsh labor. And that's
largely responsible for their low longevity.
The question is: Why were the lamas so cruel?
Why is it that the monks as the dominant force of the ruling class
banned the use of wheel - a tool that has saved untold human labor and
propelled progress across the civilization wherever the tool is
adopted and exploited.
The fact that Da Lama's predecessor the Dalai Lama #13 had already had
three fancy automobiles brought in from the West 2 from - Britain and
1 from the US (2 Austin and 1 Olds) - makes it all the more astounding
that Heinrich Harrer was still seeing the Tibetan laborers hauling
huge trunks of downed trees for miles and miles by dragging like the
"Volga Boatmen" instead of wheels when he was there from 1944-1951.
In fact, Harrer went on to say that in fact he did find evidence that
wheel was a known technology in Tibet years ago when Potala was built
for the high lamas.
So, why did the Dalai Lamas treat their subjects so badly - as beasts
of burden?
Why did they have to cut off the thief's hands - both of them - before
their henchmen took him to the edge of precipice and threw him off?
Why are they so cruel?
I tried to explain that in my previous post which is attached below
for reference.
Given the cruelty, where was compassion Da Lama now mutter when he is
speaking to his western audience? Where was compassion when Da Lama
was the supreme ruler of Tibet? Da Lama had no compassion for his
poor Tibetan subjects. All he cared were his new toys from the West
and his summer palaces at Norbulingka. And the Tibetan masses were
left to illiteracy, poverty, massive superstition and fatalism.
It's hard to see compassion when you read the "Seven Years of Tibet".
You, Neljor, should be ashamed of yourself for working to bring such a
corrupt form of government back to Tibet and for your mindless attacks
against the Chinese.
lo yeeOn
Subject: The Dark Ages in Tibet under the rule of the Lamas are
thankfully gone
Peter Terpstra <peter.t...@gmail.com> wrote:
>lo yeeOn wrote:
>
>> The Dark Ages in Tibet under the rule of the Lamas are thankfully gone
>
>How credible is your CCP based information dear friend?
>lo yeeOn wrote:
>
>> The Dark Ages in Tibet under the rule of the Lamas are thankfully gone
>
>How credible is your CCP based information dear friend?
The information I used (appended below again for your leisurely
consumption) was taken from the Seven Years in Tibet by Heinrich
Harrer, the same guy whose hairy legs fascinated the 14th Da Lama
consumption) was taken from the Seven Years in Tibet by Heinrich
and to whom the boy king summoned in the middle of the night because
he couldn't sleep. (See the Hollywood movie of the same name for the
physical actions between the two intimate "friends".)
he couldn't sleep. (See the Hollywood movie of the same name for the
Heinrich Harrer did not work for the CCP. He did not write his memoir
from any CCP information. He told it as he recalled having seen it
himself - firsthand.
>
>Don't you think there could be a complete world beyond the CCP line?
>
I don't know what you mean by "a complete world beyond the CCP line".
>
But I was not quoting any CCP line. In fact I was consciously quoting
Herr Heinrich Harrer, Da Lama's personal friend, confidante, and tutor
- someone who could not have been quoting the CCP line. And hence the
information is totally unimpeachable.
Historically, the lamas of Tibet were extremely repressive and life
under their rule was plagued by fear and harsh labor. And that's
largely responsible for their low longevity.
The question is: Why were the lamas so cruel?
Why is it that the monks as the dominant force of the ruling class
propelled progress across the civilization wherever the tool is
adopted and exploited.
The fact that Da Lama's predecessor the Dalai Lama #13 had already had
three fancy automobiles brought in from the West 2 from - Britain and
1 from the US (2 Austin and 1 Olds) - makes it all the more astounding
that Heinrich Harrer was still seeing the Tibetan laborers hauling
huge trunks of downed trees for miles and miles by dragging like the
"Volga Boatmen" instead of wheels when he was there from 1944-1951.
In fact, Harrer went on to say that in fact he did find evidence that
wheel was a known technology in Tibet years ago when Potala was built
for the high lamas.
So, why did the Dalai Lamas treat their subjects so badly - as beasts
of burden?
Why did they have to cut off the thief's hands - both of them - before
Why are they so cruel?
for reference.
Given the cruelty, where was compassion Da Lama now mutter when he is
speaking to his western audience? Where was compassion when Da Lama
was the supreme ruler of Tibet? Da Lama had no compassion for his
poor Tibetan subjects. All he cared were his new toys from the West
and his summer palaces at Norbulingka. And the Tibetan masses were
left to illiteracy, poverty, massive superstition and fatalism.
It's hard to see compassion when you read the "Seven Years of Tibet".
You, Neljor, should be ashamed of yourself for working to bring such a
corrupt form of government back to Tibet and for your mindless attacks
against the Chinese.
lo yeeOn
thankfully gone
hab...@anony.net
May 9, 2013, 7:32:05 PM5/9/13
to
That is no excuse to take over their country and make them a minority
as China is doing in Tibet , Xin Jiang and Inner Mongolia
as China is doing in Tibet , Xin Jiang and Inner Mongolia
and/or www.mantra.com/jai
May 9, 2013, 7:40:56 PM5/9/13
to
In article
<3822638.IuC11lHnEj@Dharma>,
Peter Terpstra <peter.terpst...@gmail.com> posted:
Dhanyavaad for your post.
Jai Maharaj, Jyotishi
Om Shanti
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.jai-maharaj
<3822638.IuC11lHnEj@Dharma>,
Peter Terpstra <peter.terpst...@gmail.com> posted:
Jai Maharaj, Jyotishi
Om Shanti
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.jai-maharaj
rst9
May 9, 2013, 9:53:01 PM5/9/13
to
On May 9, 4:32 pm, hab...@anony.net wrote:
> That is no excuse to take over their country and make them a minority
> as China is doing in Tibet , Xin Jiang and Inner Mongolia
You should study and learn something about Chinese history as you are
> That is no excuse to take over their country and make them a minority
> as China is doing in Tibet , Xin Jiang and Inner Mongolia
as ignorant as Peter the Dutch idiot.
Peter Terpstra
May 10, 2013, 3:38:03 PM5/10/13
to
wrote:
> Dhanyavaad for your post.
You are welcome sir.
Kind Regards, Peter
> Dhanyavaad for your post.
You are welcome sir.
Kind Regards, Peter
Peter Terpstra
May 10, 2013, 6:17:36 PM5/10/13
to
lo yeeOn wrote:
[Tssssk......too crazy :-)]
> So, Harrer's memoir does provide a little peek into the dark secrets
> of the monk-dominated Tibet under Da Lama. It was a shameful history
> that has justly been cast out so that all human beings can move forth
> on an equal footing.
You should really read those books instead of converting it into CCP propagnada lies.
I have read the books, HH has deep admiration for Great Tibet and the Lamas!
Another one:
“Tibet prior to Chinese invasion and colonization has been portrayed in the West as an idyllic society devoted to the
practice of Buddhism, a nation that required no police force because its people voluntarily observed the laws of
karma, a society in which, through the workings of an "inner democracy," a peasant boy might become a great
lama.”
From book: Prisoners of Shangrila.
Hehehehe :-)
May all be well with you sir,
Love, Peter
[Tssssk......too crazy :-)]
> So, Harrer's memoir does provide a little peek into the dark secrets
> of the monk-dominated Tibet under Da Lama. It was a shameful history
> that has justly been cast out so that all human beings can move forth
> on an equal footing.
I have read the books, HH has deep admiration for Great Tibet and the Lamas!
Another one:
“Tibet prior to Chinese invasion and colonization has been portrayed in the West as an idyllic society devoted to the
practice of Buddhism, a nation that required no police force because its people voluntarily observed the laws of
karma, a society in which, through the workings of an "inner democracy," a peasant boy might become a great
lama.”
From book: Prisoners of Shangrila.
Hehehehe :-)
May all be well with you sir,
rst9
May 10, 2013, 9:00:55 PM5/10/13
to
On May 10, 3:17 pm, Peter Terpstra <peter.terpst...@gmail.com> wrote:
> lo yeeOn wrote:
>
> [Tssssk......too crazy :-)]
I always said you are crazy.
> lo yeeOn wrote:
>
> [Tssssk......too crazy :-)]
>
> > So, Harrer's memoir does provide a little peek into the dark secrets
> > of the monk-dominated Tibet under Da Lama. It was a shameful history
> > that has justly been cast out so that all human beings can move forth
> > on an equal footing.
>
> You should really read those books instead of converting it into CCP propagnada lies.
> I have read the books, HH has deep admiration for Great Tibet and the Lamas!
>
> Another one:
>
> “Tibet prior to Chinese invasion and colonization has been portrayed in the West as an idyllic society
> devoted to the practice of Buddhism,
people. You should be ashamed to say this.
lo yeeOn
May 11, 2013, 6:35:22 AM5/11/13
to
In article <18768493.AcGEZKT11F@Dharma>,
Don't keep on pretending, you're too crazy to continue to pretend that
Heinrich Harrer did not write what is in his "Seven Years of Tibet".
When you pretend, you are pathetic and unbelievable.
>
>> So, Harrer's memoir does provide a little peek into the dark secrets
>> of the monk-dominated Tibet under Da Lama. It was a shameful history
>> that has justly been cast out so that all human beings can move forth
>> on an equal footing.
>
>You should really read those books instead of converting it into CCP
>propagnada lies.
If I did not read Harrer's "Seven Years of Tibet", please explain to
the rest of the newsgroups here how I came up with those words in the
quotes in my previous posts.
Who said this?
The CCP? No! Heinrich Harrer did!
Please see p.169-170 English version translated by Richard Graves with
an introduction written by Peter Fleming (a Dutton book).
----
Who said this?
I became more and more convinced that Tibet's great days belonged to
the past. There is a stone obelisk dating from A.D. 763 which bears
witness to my theory. ...
The CCP? No! Heinrich Harrer did!
See p.170, ibid.
----
Who said this?
Venereal disease is very common in Tibet. Many cases occur in Lhasa
but not much importance is attached to them. They are generally
neglected and the doctor is called in when it is too late to do much
good. The ancient remedy of mercury is known to the monks in the
schools of medicine.
What a lot could be done for the future of Tibet if medical and
sanitary conditions were improved. ...
The CCP? No! Harrer did.
See p.198 ibid.
But notice that in fact Harrer's wish of improved medical and sanitary
conditions in Tibet did finally come true when the CCP came. Isn't it
a small wonder that the averaged longevity for indigenuous Tibetans
are in the 60s today?
----
Who said this?
Tibet knows nothing about the drawbacks of overpopulation. For
centuries the number of inhabitants has remained about the same. In
addition to the practices of polyandry and monasticism infant
mortality contributes to this state of things. I calculate that the
average expectation of life among the Tibetans is only about thirty
years. A great number of small children die and among the whole
mass of officials there is only one septuagenarian.
Did the CCP say that? No, Harrer did.
See p.197, ibid.
Life expectancy "is only about thirty years"?
Again, observe that only after the CCP wrested power from the lamas
have the Tibetans become liberated from their 30-something life
expectancy. Isn't it amazing that the CCP has been responsible for
the improved lot of the Tibetan people?
----
Who said this?
The supremacy of the monastic orders in Tibet is something unique.
It can well be compared to a stern dictatorship. The monks mistrust
any influences from the outside world which might undermine their
authority. They are clever enough not to believe that their power
is limit less, but they punish anyone who suggests that it is not.
For that reason some of the monks of Kyirong disapproved of our
close contact with the villgers. Our behavior, which remained
uninfluenced by any of their superstitutions, must have given the
Tibetans something to think about. We used to go by night in the
forests without being molested by demons, we climbed mountains
without lighting sacrificial fires, and still northing happened to
us. In some quarters we noticed a certain reserve which could only
be attributed to the influence of the lamas. I think they must have
credited us with supernatural powers, for they were convinced that
our excursions had some hidden purpose. They kept on asking us why
we were alaways communing with streams and birds. No Tibetan ever
takes a step without a particular object, and they felt that when we
roamed in the woods or sat by brooks we were not doing so aimlessly.
Did the CCP say that? No, Harrer did.
See p.89-90 ibid.
Tibetans were obviously brainwashed by the lamas into believing in
monsters ...
----
Who said this?
There are no police in our sense of the word. Evildoers are
publicly sentenced. The punishments are pretty drastic but they
seem to suit the mentality of the population. I was told of a man
who had stolen a golden butter lamp from one of the temples in
Kyirong. He was convicted of the offense and what we would think an
inhuman sentence was carreid out. His hands were publicly cut off
and he was then sewn up in a wet yak skin. After this had been
allowed to dry, he was thrown over a precipice.
Did the CCP make that up? No! The Tibetans gave Harrer that account.
See p.88-89, ibid.
----
And who said this?
There is no organized system of law courts in TIbet. The
investigation of offenses is entrusted to two or three person of
noble rank, but corruption is unfortunately very prevalent; in fact
very few nobles have a high reputation for integrity. The sums
received as bribes are regarded by many as part of the perquisites
of the feudal system. If a defendant considers that he has been
unjustly condemned, he is allowed to appeal to the Dalai Lama. If
he thus proved innocent, he rceives a free pardon; and if not his
penalty is doubled.
Did the CCP say that? No, Harrer did.
See p.193, ibid.
----
Who said this?
The penalties for political offenses are very strict. People still
speak of the monks of Tengyeling who forty years ago sought to come
to terms with the Chinese. Their monastery was demolished and their
names blotted out.
Did the CCP say that? No, Harrer did.
See p.192-193, ibid.
----
Who said this?
"Women know nothing about equal rights and are quite happy as they
are. They spent hours making up their faces, restringing their
pearl necklaces, choosing new material for dresses, and thinking how
to outshine Mrs. So-and-so at the next party. They do not have to
bother about housekeeping, which is all done by the servants. But
to show that she is mistress the lady of the house always carries a
large bunch of keys around with her. In Lhasa every trifling object
is locked up and double-locked."
The CCP? No, Harrer did.
See p.159, ibid.
Obviously, The women Harrer saw were those in the ruling class. And
is it little wonder that this kind of strange behavior actually
existed when the feudal Tibetan society was basically devided between
those who didn't have to work but owned much and those who were
chronically impoverished and had to work all their lives for those who
own much? Tibet under the rule of the lamas was a huge problem for
the masses. Why is Woeser still defending them? Why is she burning
incense and worshipping Da Lama? Where is her feminism? I see none.
Woeser has sold her soul to Hillary Clinton's and John Kerry's State
Department of the United States. She cannot be at all a voice for the
millions of Tibetan women, as soon as I read the above from Harrer's
book!
-----
And who said this:
The Holy parents had in all six children. The eldest son, long
before the discovery of the Dalai Lama, had been reocgnized as an
Incarnation of Buddha and invested with the dignity of a lama in the
monastery of Tagtsel. He too w as styled Rampoche, the form of
address applied to all lamas. The second, Gyalo Thuendrup, was at
school in CHina. Our young acquintance Lobsang was destined for a
monastic life. The Dalai Lama was now eleven years old. Besides
his brothers he had two sisters. Subsequently the "Holy Mother"
gave birth to another "Incarnation", Ngari Rimpoche. As the mother
of three "Incarnations" she had the record for the Buddhist world.
Did the CCP say that? No, Harrer did.
See p.145, ibid.
This is a classic example of corruption!
>I have read the books, HH has deep admiration for Great Tibet and the
Lamas!
If you have, I am sure that everyone around these newsgroups would be
so thrilled to here you quote from them.
But given how sneaky/disingenuous you are, I am not sure if you use
the acronym "HH" to represent His Holiness or Heinrich Harrer. But if
you meant Harrer, then clearly, you would be beyond disingenuousness
to claim that what I quoted from his Seven Years in Tibet did not come
from it - but instead "converting it into CCP propagnada lies".
What Harrer wrote is what Harrer wrote. It requires no conversion.
If you think there is something wrong in the translation, then you
should accuse the translator Richard Graves and the guy who wrote a
forward to the book by the name of Peter Fleming. Sue them! But
don't make false accusation against me.
Besides, what do you mean those books? I mentioned Heinrich Harrer's
"Seven Years of Tibet". It's just one book! By claiming that you
have read the book and then called what Harrer wrote CCP propaganda
lies, you show yourself to be entirely dishonest.
Your original post was taken from an article Woeser wrote recently
accusing the Chinese film workers of distorting the Tibetan culture.
I have responded by saying that it may well be the case. But the
Tibetan culture was molded by the lamas. Judging from what Harrer
witnessed firsthand, the Tibetan culture belonged to the Dark Ages and
since the lamas formed the ruling class, all that darkness coould have
only come from the religious-based politicians and their hypocritical
religious institution named Tibetan Buddhism. Tibetan Buddhism is not
Buddhism because where is compassion in the way the lamas treated the
Tibetan masses? The superstitions and the fear that has taken over
the souls of the masses have continued to render them slaves to the
evil religion. So, why blame the film workers when they're having
difficulty understanding the culture. Even Heinrich Harrer did not
Of course, Harrer mischaracterized the problem. It surely wasn't "the
people of Tibet" who were "rigidly opposed to any form of progress".
Rather, it has to be the lamas, the ruling class, who had deliberately
made it impossible for the people to enjoy the sweet fruit of
mechanization of labor or any form of progress that have long been
known in India as well as China, by depriving them of education and
the ability to think and by depriving them opportunities to either
experiment with the tools, make them, or use them. How can Woeser
blame the CCP for what the monks and monasteries of feudal Tibet have
done to the Tibetan people?
"CCP lines"? No such thing! Harrer said them all!
The Tibetan monks have been embarassed by Harrer ever since, despite
the privileged status he had with Da Lama's ruling class when he was
in Tibet.
lo yeeOn
>
>Another one:
>
>"Tibet prior to Chinese invasion and colonization has been portrayed
>in the West as an idyllic society devoted to the practice of
>Buddhism, a nation that required no police force because its people
>voluntarily observed the laws of karma, a society in which, through
>the workings of an "inner democracy," a peasant boy might become a
>great lama." From book: Prisoners of Shangrila. Hehehehe :-)
"Another one" yourself, Hard-yards!
Yes, that is called lottery, don't you understand? Some abbots going
around the region to look for the smartest boy about a year or two of
age. If it wasn't this boy, it would be another boy. But only one
boy would be the winner and he would prevent all other boys from
winning the lotto until he dies. So, this type of lottery is much
worse for the society than those we find in the U.S. - much less
democratic for sure and much more unfair to all the poor families.
But by virtue of the anointment of one boy, all the lamas get to stay
on top of the society. The boy's family will be doing the lamas'
bidding for the rest of his life.
What society needs such a crazy lucky break for a randomly chosen boy
which the lamas aggrandize as "karma".
There is in fact no karma involved. What did the chosen boy's family
do that was so drastically different from the deeds of other families
that made the differentiation? None, except by the deceiving lamas'
own proclamation!
And once a little peasant boy won the lottery, even his mother came to
hold the Buddhist world's record of being the laughable "mother of all
incarnations".
Did you see the above quote from Harrer's Seven Years in Tibet? She
had 6 children and three of them were somehow declared "Incarnations
of Buddha". Of course, it is nothing but the most depraved form of
corruption of power known to the world.
You can "Hehehehe :-)" but you have done nothing except to lower your
own credibility. I hope you realize that!
--------
Now let's look at the unethical conduct of the Dalai Lamas... and that
of the U.S. government too! Re: No one is free of Criticism including
China:
In article <7288330.Ssghh1SrV1@Dharma>,
Peter Terpstra <peter.t...@gmail.com> wrote:
>rst9 wrote:
>
>> Why don't you stop lying to serve your own agenda. Anyone is free to
>> travel to Xinjiang and Tibet, go there and see for yourself.
>
>You are not reading the article dear friend, there are no journalists aloud
>there and the reports of HR violations are big.
>Your information runs short by completely trusting CCP propaganda that
>leaves out and distorts a lot.
>
>> 3 were killed included a Chinese student from Shenyang, China, and over 260
>> injured in Boston at the Boston Marath.
>
>That is another very tragic matter, do not use this to whitewash CCP
>crimes, it does not make
>you credible in any way.
>
>No one is free of Criticism including China.
>
>Love, Peter (Neljor)
Don't be sanctimonious and don't distort what the other poster said.
He was only responding to your statement that 21 people were killed in
China's Xinjiang.
You were so rude that you even took out letters from the term "Boston
Marathon". I checked his original follow-up. He had it spelled
correctly. But you are so full of yourself that you mangled his words
and didn't care.
His response to the mention of the Xinjiang terrorist incident was:
> On Tuesday, or so it seems, 21 people were killed in the region of
> Xinjiang in northwest China.
3 were killed included a Chinese student from Shenyang, China, and
over 260 injured in Boston at the Boston Marathon.
Both incidents were domestic terrorism, at least that is how a lot of
people see them.
Both are tragic. And in the case of the Boston Marathon bombings, it
further serves to prove that invading and occupying Afghanistan has
not prevented a terrorist attack from happening in the United States.
The Chechen brothers were boys when they arrived in the States some
ten years ago and Americans troops had already been in Afghanistan by
then. So, destroying the bin Laden training camp did nothing to
prevent the attack against Americans in Libya's Benghazi on 9/11 in
2012 nor did it prevent the Boston bombings this year.
So, why are we still dragging our feet to pull out?
This has to be the most farcical withdrawing in the annals of world
civilization. Is it not a great tragedy that seven American troops
died needlessly when we had all year in 2012 to pull out but instead
the politicians want to stay until the end of 2014 just to reduce the
troops to some 12,000?
A US civilian cargo plane has crashed at Bagram airbase in
Afghanistan, killing its seven crew, officials say.
Why do they have to die? Why?
And then another 8 ISAF soldiers were killed in less than a week
later? Why?
Attacks across Afghanistan kill 8 service members, including at
least 5 Americans
And then there were 3 British soldiers killed in Afghanistan just a
week before. Why?
And then in the same week of the Bagram plane crash that killed 7
Americans, there was another military cargo plane crash taking off
from a base in Kyrgyzstan, trying to bring fuel into Afghanistan,
killing an unknown number of crew members. Why?
These victims lost their lives in Afghanistan because the old men in
Washington lied. Those who died didn't have to die, had enough of us
the people recognized the folly of the Afghan war.
There is no reason to talk up a complete withdrawal from Afghanistan
and then sit on it for three more years before reducing the troop
level to 12,000 men and still keeping Bagram. What kind of
manuevering is that - other than Washington's desire to keep the
airbase in Bagram?
That is a real tragedy that nothing China has done can match.
China has not bombed another country. And China has only wrested
power from the decadent monks and landowners.
China's success in defeating the decadent monks and landowners has
resulted in the freedom of millions of Tibetan serfs who had been
hereditarily enslaved. They were enslaved due to the lies of Tibetan
Buddhism.
The Dalai Lama always reincarnates as Dalai Lama while the serfs die
and reincarnate as worms;
The Dalai Lama is a living Buddha when in reality they love worldly
pleasure and material possessions. Indeed they used 36 people to
carry their sedans and enjoyed an opulent lifestyle at their summer
palaces at Norbulingka - so much so that they sneaked back there
often even when they were supposed to be at their official residence
praying and meditating at Potola.
The Dalai Lamas have perfect knowledge and yet they didn't even have
the foresight to choose a suitable place for their palaces. So they
built the Potola palace which no doubt killed many serfs because of
the difficulty required to build it. And yet the Dalai Lamas hated
the place and so since the 7th Dalai Lama, Norbulingka became their
lust and obsession. They built and built and destroyed the flora
and fauna. They have no doubt killed many snow leopards because
even Da Lama's private tutor from Austria, Herr Heinrich Harrer
witnessed the death of one that wandered into Norbulingka.
The Dalai Lamas were acting like scum bags and were no less
disgusting.
Unfortunately for the Tibetans, former Chinese governments only had
symbolic presence in Tibet because China was starving and occupied by
foreign forces. Only after the CCP won, the serfs were liberated and
now the masses are free to do what they want to do. They don't need
foreigners to incite violence and impose misery on them.
How do I know that? I know because a man with the nom de plume of
Theurang told me. So let's read what I said below.
lo yeeOn
Subject: The Tibetans are smiling and that makes Theurang unhappy! So
where is THeurang's compassion? Re: They treat us like animals By
Theurang (writer)
In article <7167513.oz1WfLRYUc@Dharma>,
Peter Terpstra <peter.t...@gmail.com> wrote:
>"They treat us like animals"
>Tuesday, 7 May 2013
>
>Tashi Rabten (pen name: Theurang) is a Tibetan writer, poet and editor
>who is serving a four-year sentence in Mianyang Prison,
>Sichuan Province. He graduated from North-West University for
>Nationalities and edited the now-banned Tibetan language
>journal "Shar Dungri" and also published "Written in Blood", a
>compilation of his poems, notes and writings on the situation in
>Tibet following the 2008 protests.
>
>In this essay, translated by TCHRD, the writer condemns the cultural
>insensitivity of Chinese tourists and the commercialization
>of Tibetan culture as the number of Chinese tourists continues to rise,
>exerting immense pressure on the fragile ecology and
>landscape of the Tibetan Plateau.
>
>They treat us like animals
Bad title! 'cos it's making a false advertisement.
A reader's normal response to the words "They treat us like animals"
is that of "They treat us badly".
The article below doesn't convey that kind of imagery. It's easy for
an average reader to say that the author is belly-aching. "What's he
complaining about? Tourists giving indigenous people money who are
all too happy to accept? Tourists snapping pictures at anybody in
sight? Tourists sharing the surrounding of monasteries with the
indigenous people? Jeez-Louise, what kind of times are we living in
today? Even if there are no tourists in London or New York, CCTV are
still all over the respective city, constantly monitoring every face
in its sight.
And the news media has just finished praising these CCTV cameras in
Boston for the speed with which the FBI succeeded in identifying the
bombing suspects.
And when you think about it, perhaps these tourist cameras may also
serve as a socially (in addition to the individually) useful function
of capturing the faces of a few potential self-immolation inciters
among the monks near the monasteries. How about that for a win-win
situation?
Also, if you read Heinrich Harrer's Sieben Jahre in Tibet (Seven Years
in Tibet), you'll learn that Da Lama had several expensive telescopes
in his possession. And he had some of them mounted on a balcony at
his Potola Palace residential quarters overlooking the town of Lhasa.
There he enjoyed peering into his telescopes to check out what the
people were doing in their gardens.
Harrer observed that many of Da Lama's subjects would, as soon as they
discovered that they were being watched and studied, quickly remove
themselves from plain view. And they would explain that they didn't
want to "sadden the heart" of their young ruler.
So, we can see that snooping is not a new phenomenon in Tibet. The
only difference is that today a tourist can aim his/her camera at you
if you are on a street while during the years when Da Lama was still
the ruler of Tibet, only he was privileged to watch over your every
moves.
So, Theurang, author of "They treat us like animials", really does not
have a legitimate complaint against either the tourists who have been
flocking to Tibet these days or the Chinese government for promoting
tourism over there.
Actually, the author is quite bitter about his fellow Tibetans who are
all too happy to earn some money by being the locals who know their
way.
What makes me laugh and cry at the same time is to witness the
smiling faces of the Tibetan masses lured by hard cash. . . .
. . . When tourist vehicles arrive, ruddy-faced Tibetan women and
snot-nosed Tibetan boys rush into action with their horses. Holding
their breath, desperation in their eyes, they carry Chinese tourists
on their horses and walk up the mountains. Holding fifty-Yuan notes
in their hands, smiles written all over their faces, they kill their
time waiting for the arrival of other tourists. When I see them, I
wonder how a race that once conquered two-thirds of the world's
territory has now been turned into a bunch of soul-less slaves
serving other people. My dear fellow-countrymen, if we cannot paint
the bones of our ancestors in gold, the least we could do is not to
throw their gray hair in the wind.
But why did the author begrudge the masses for being materialistic
when the Dalai Lamas for generations have been so glad to collect gold
watches, diamond music boxes, all kinds of jewels, and tons and tons
of gold bars and gold coins? Why can't he have a little compassion
and share the joy of his own people whose parents or grandparents were
serfs working in extreme conditions just to have food in the stomach
in the end of the day while the abbots and landowners lived like
kings?
While I can sympathize with Theurang, the author, for his sentimental
yearning for an era that is gone, there is no suggestion whatsoever
that "They treat us like animials".
Actually, the author is extremely confused about that certain "race
that once conquered two-thirds of the world's territory" that, in his
view, "has now been turned into a bunch of soul-less slaves serving
other people". Be a little more kind to your own people and a lot
less assured of your righteousness, will you?
First, as you know from history, there might have been a "race" that
"once conquered two-thirds of the world's territory", if you want to
discount the Americas and Africa as well as much of the rest of the
planet, but it couldn't hold on to much of that territory for even a
hundred years. Part of the reason, about which many historians can
readily agree, is that the Mongols weren't sufficiently sophisticated
to rule that amount of territory, once they got off their horses and
put their swords away.
Second, the Tibetan masses didn't have a chance once they were turned
into serfs serving the monks after the latter figured out how to use
religion to make them superstitious, illiterate, and willing to work
for the ruling class practically for free for their entire lives and
still expect to reincarnate as worms in the next life.
Given the historical context, the Tibetans never had a choice. They
were only liberated when the CCP came and wrested the power from the
landowners and the abbots, and outlawed serfdom and instituted land
reform.
Theurang can fill himself with "anger" and let "resentment boil in"
his own heart. But what he has described lends plenty of support to
the Chinese government's claim that the West's accusation that it
represses the Tibetans is a lie.
China's ruling class has no incentive to repress its minorities
because there are so many of them in substantial numbers. If they do
not repress the Miao or the Manchu, for example, then what motivation
is there for them to selectively repress the Uighurs or Da Lama's
followers, other than the facts that they are terrorists and
treacherous elements in the society who are wilfully working with
foreigners to destabilize the country to cause it to fall apart?
Thanks Theurang, your article does a lot of good to vindicate the
Chinese government - against the lies and distortions from the VOA,
RFA, and the like of BBC News' Damian Grammaticas.
lo yeeOn
>
> By Theurang
>
>During the summer, my homeland is filled with swarms of Chinese
>tourists. The rush of tourists means that elderly Tibetans are having
>difficulties circumambulating the monasteries. Covering their heads
>in robes, monks and nuns stand by gaping at the tourists in silence.
>When I see these images, when I think about them, I suffer from
>intense pain and despair. Anger and resentment boil in my heart.
>Today, under the crushing boots of foreigners, my homeland is
>suffering from degeneration and decay.
>
>Like swarms of ants unleashed by anthills, these increasing number of
>tourists are making preparations to settle themselves permanently on
>our lands. What makes me laugh and cry at the same time is to witness
>the smiling faces of the Tibetan masses lured by hard cash. Even the
>leaders of the nomadic villages have signed contracts to sell their
>lands. In the next two to three years, these visitors who call
>themselves tourists will settle permanently on our lands.
>
>When tourist vehicles arrive, ruddy-faced Tibetan women and
>snot-nosed Tibetan boys rush into action with their horses. Holding
>their breath, desperation in their eyes, they carry Chinese tourists
>on their horses and walk up the mountains. Holding fifty-Yuan notes
>in their hands, smiles written all over their faces, they kill their
>time waiting for the arrival of other tourists. When I see them, I
>wonder how a race that once conquered two-thirds of the world's
>territory has now been turned into a bunch of soul-less slaves
>serving other people. My dear fellow-countrymen, if we cannot paint
>the bones of our ancestors in gold, the least we could do is not to
>throw their gray hair in the wind.
>
>Tourists visiting from surrounding areas carry cameras of different
>sizes in their hands. Crowds of monks, elderly folks and "servicemen"
>bearing horses gape at the tourists when the latter take pictures of
>nomadic villages and rivers. One of the tourists pointed his camera
>at the strange-looking eyes of these Tibetans and took their
>pictures. When I saw this, I wondered:
>
>"When the tourist returns to his place, where would he advertize this
>picture and what sort of caption would he give it?" These thoughts
>gave me intense pain and despair.
>
>Why do these tourists point their cameras on the faces of elderly
>Tibetans and take their pictures? Do these tourists not have a sense
>of ethics and morality? If we turn around and point the camera on
>their faces and take their pictures, wouldn't they run away from us
>saying we are violating their rights? The fact that they keep taking
>pictures of our people, our mountains and our villages "despite
>knowing that such actions are unethical, immoral and illegal" clearly
>shows what kind of status our people enjoy. They treat us like
>animals lacking the ability of speech. They treat us as wage laborers
>who could be swayed in any direction by the lure of hard cash. They
>treat us as a race of ignorant barbarians. My dear fellow countrymen,
>as the saying goes, if sons fail to inherit the legacy of forefathers
>or if the thread fails to inherit the legacy of needles, others would
>keep trampling on our heads.
>
>What would happen if you visit a Chinese city and randomly point your
>camera on the face of a Chinese and take his picture? What
>consequences would you have to bear if you selfishly take pictures of
>homes, belongings and other precious objects of a city? How would the
>whip of laws chase you away if you trample upon the rights and
>liberties of people living in a city? Why can't the standards of law
>and ethics of the cities be applied equally in our nomadic
>grasslands? Why can't camera-holding tourists riding in cars and
>masses on horses enjoy equal status if human rights have a universal
>resonance? Like in the cities, why can't we put up signboards in
>nomadic grasslands declaring, "Taking pictures, peeing and spitting
>are strictly prohibited here!"
>
>http://www.tchrd.org/2013/05/they-treat-us-like-animals/
Don't keep on pretending, you're too crazy to continue to pretend that
Heinrich Harrer did not write what is in his "Seven Years of Tibet".
When you pretend, you are pathetic and unbelievable.
>
>> So, Harrer's memoir does provide a little peek into the dark secrets
>> of the monk-dominated Tibet under Da Lama. It was a shameful history
>> that has justly been cast out so that all human beings can move forth
>> on an equal footing.
>
>You should really read those books instead of converting it into CCP
>propagnada lies.
the rest of the newsgroups here how I came up with those words in the
quotes in my previous posts.
Who said this?
Please see p.169-170 English version translated by Richard Graves with
an introduction written by Peter Fleming (a Dutton book).
----
Who said this?
I became more and more convinced that Tibet's great days belonged to
the past. There is a stone obelisk dating from A.D. 763 which bears
witness to my theory. ...
See p.170, ibid.
----
Who said this?
Venereal disease is very common in Tibet. Many cases occur in Lhasa
but not much importance is attached to them. They are generally
neglected and the doctor is called in when it is too late to do much
good. The ancient remedy of mercury is known to the monks in the
schools of medicine.
What a lot could be done for the future of Tibet if medical and
sanitary conditions were improved. ...
The CCP? No! Harrer did.
See p.198 ibid.
But notice that in fact Harrer's wish of improved medical and sanitary
conditions in Tibet did finally come true when the CCP came. Isn't it
a small wonder that the averaged longevity for indigenuous Tibetans
are in the 60s today?
----
Who said this?
Tibet knows nothing about the drawbacks of overpopulation. For
centuries the number of inhabitants has remained about the same. In
addition to the practices of polyandry and monasticism infant
mortality contributes to this state of things. I calculate that the
average expectation of life among the Tibetans is only about thirty
years. A great number of small children die and among the whole
mass of officials there is only one septuagenarian.
Did the CCP say that? No, Harrer did.
See p.197, ibid.
Life expectancy "is only about thirty years"?
Again, observe that only after the CCP wrested power from the lamas
have the Tibetans become liberated from their 30-something life
expectancy. Isn't it amazing that the CCP has been responsible for
the improved lot of the Tibetan people?
----
Who said this?
The supremacy of the monastic orders in Tibet is something unique.
It can well be compared to a stern dictatorship. The monks mistrust
any influences from the outside world which might undermine their
authority. They are clever enough not to believe that their power
is limit less, but they punish anyone who suggests that it is not.
For that reason some of the monks of Kyirong disapproved of our
close contact with the villgers. Our behavior, which remained
uninfluenced by any of their superstitutions, must have given the
Tibetans something to think about. We used to go by night in the
forests without being molested by demons, we climbed mountains
without lighting sacrificial fires, and still northing happened to
us. In some quarters we noticed a certain reserve which could only
be attributed to the influence of the lamas. I think they must have
credited us with supernatural powers, for they were convinced that
our excursions had some hidden purpose. They kept on asking us why
we were alaways communing with streams and birds. No Tibetan ever
takes a step without a particular object, and they felt that when we
roamed in the woods or sat by brooks we were not doing so aimlessly.
Did the CCP say that? No, Harrer did.
See p.89-90 ibid.
Tibetans were obviously brainwashed by the lamas into believing in
monsters ...
----
Who said this?
There are no police in our sense of the word. Evildoers are
publicly sentenced. The punishments are pretty drastic but they
seem to suit the mentality of the population. I was told of a man
who had stolen a golden butter lamp from one of the temples in
Kyirong. He was convicted of the offense and what we would think an
inhuman sentence was carreid out. His hands were publicly cut off
and he was then sewn up in a wet yak skin. After this had been
allowed to dry, he was thrown over a precipice.
Did the CCP make that up? No! The Tibetans gave Harrer that account.
See p.88-89, ibid.
----
And who said this?
There is no organized system of law courts in TIbet. The
investigation of offenses is entrusted to two or three person of
noble rank, but corruption is unfortunately very prevalent; in fact
very few nobles have a high reputation for integrity. The sums
received as bribes are regarded by many as part of the perquisites
of the feudal system. If a defendant considers that he has been
unjustly condemned, he is allowed to appeal to the Dalai Lama. If
he thus proved innocent, he rceives a free pardon; and if not his
penalty is doubled.
Did the CCP say that? No, Harrer did.
See p.193, ibid.
----
Who said this?
The penalties for political offenses are very strict. People still
speak of the monks of Tengyeling who forty years ago sought to come
to terms with the Chinese. Their monastery was demolished and their
names blotted out.
Did the CCP say that? No, Harrer did.
See p.192-193, ibid.
----
Who said this?
"Women know nothing about equal rights and are quite happy as they
are. They spent hours making up their faces, restringing their
pearl necklaces, choosing new material for dresses, and thinking how
to outshine Mrs. So-and-so at the next party. They do not have to
bother about housekeeping, which is all done by the servants. But
to show that she is mistress the lady of the house always carries a
large bunch of keys around with her. In Lhasa every trifling object
is locked up and double-locked."
The CCP? No, Harrer did.
See p.159, ibid.
Obviously, The women Harrer saw were those in the ruling class. And
is it little wonder that this kind of strange behavior actually
existed when the feudal Tibetan society was basically devided between
those who didn't have to work but owned much and those who were
chronically impoverished and had to work all their lives for those who
own much? Tibet under the rule of the lamas was a huge problem for
the masses. Why is Woeser still defending them? Why is she burning
incense and worshipping Da Lama? Where is her feminism? I see none.
Woeser has sold her soul to Hillary Clinton's and John Kerry's State
Department of the United States. She cannot be at all a voice for the
millions of Tibetan women, as soon as I read the above from Harrer's
book!
-----
And who said this:
The Holy parents had in all six children. The eldest son, long
before the discovery of the Dalai Lama, had been reocgnized as an
Incarnation of Buddha and invested with the dignity of a lama in the
monastery of Tagtsel. He too w as styled Rampoche, the form of
address applied to all lamas. The second, Gyalo Thuendrup, was at
school in CHina. Our young acquintance Lobsang was destined for a
monastic life. The Dalai Lama was now eleven years old. Besides
his brothers he had two sisters. Subsequently the "Holy Mother"
gave birth to another "Incarnation", Ngari Rimpoche. As the mother
of three "Incarnations" she had the record for the Buddhist world.
Did the CCP say that? No, Harrer did.
See p.145, ibid.
This is a classic example of corruption!
>I have read the books, HH has deep admiration for Great Tibet and the
Lamas!
so thrilled to here you quote from them.
But given how sneaky/disingenuous you are, I am not sure if you use
the acronym "HH" to represent His Holiness or Heinrich Harrer. But if
you meant Harrer, then clearly, you would be beyond disingenuousness
to claim that what I quoted from his Seven Years in Tibet did not come
from it - but instead "converting it into CCP propagnada lies".
What Harrer wrote is what Harrer wrote. It requires no conversion.
If you think there is something wrong in the translation, then you
should accuse the translator Richard Graves and the guy who wrote a
forward to the book by the name of Peter Fleming. Sue them! But
don't make false accusation against me.
Besides, what do you mean those books? I mentioned Heinrich Harrer's
"Seven Years of Tibet". It's just one book! By claiming that you
have read the book and then called what Harrer wrote CCP propaganda
lies, you show yourself to be entirely dishonest.
Your original post was taken from an article Woeser wrote recently
accusing the Chinese film workers of distorting the Tibetan culture.
I have responded by saying that it may well be the case. But the
Tibetan culture was molded by the lamas. Judging from what Harrer
witnessed firsthand, the Tibetan culture belonged to the Dark Ages and
since the lamas formed the ruling class, all that darkness coould have
only come from the religious-based politicians and their hypocritical
religious institution named Tibetan Buddhism. Tibetan Buddhism is not
Buddhism because where is compassion in the way the lamas treated the
Tibetan masses? The superstitions and the fear that has taken over
the souls of the masses have continued to render them slaves to the
evil religion. So, why blame the film workers when they're having
difficulty understanding the culture. Even Heinrich Harrer did not
understand it. He said:
"I could not understand why the people of Tibet were so rigidly
opposed to any form of progress..."
"I could not understand why the people of Tibet were so rigidly
Of course, Harrer mischaracterized the problem. It surely wasn't "the
people of Tibet" who were "rigidly opposed to any form of progress".
Rather, it has to be the lamas, the ruling class, who had deliberately
made it impossible for the people to enjoy the sweet fruit of
mechanization of labor or any form of progress that have long been
known in India as well as China, by depriving them of education and
the ability to think and by depriving them opportunities to either
experiment with the tools, make them, or use them. How can Woeser
blame the CCP for what the monks and monasteries of feudal Tibet have
done to the Tibetan people?
"CCP lines"? No such thing! Harrer said them all!
The Tibetan monks have been embarassed by Harrer ever since, despite
the privileged status he had with Da Lama's ruling class when he was
in Tibet.
lo yeeOn
>
>Another one:
>
>"Tibet prior to Chinese invasion and colonization has been portrayed
>in the West as an idyllic society devoted to the practice of
>Buddhism, a nation that required no police force because its people
>voluntarily observed the laws of karma, a society in which, through
>the workings of an "inner democracy," a peasant boy might become a
>great lama." From book: Prisoners of Shangrila. Hehehehe :-)
Yes, that is called lottery, don't you understand? Some abbots going
around the region to look for the smartest boy about a year or two of
age. If it wasn't this boy, it would be another boy. But only one
boy would be the winner and he would prevent all other boys from
winning the lotto until he dies. So, this type of lottery is much
worse for the society than those we find in the U.S. - much less
democratic for sure and much more unfair to all the poor families.
But by virtue of the anointment of one boy, all the lamas get to stay
on top of the society. The boy's family will be doing the lamas'
bidding for the rest of his life.
What society needs such a crazy lucky break for a randomly chosen boy
which the lamas aggrandize as "karma".
There is in fact no karma involved. What did the chosen boy's family
do that was so drastically different from the deeds of other families
that made the differentiation? None, except by the deceiving lamas'
own proclamation!
And once a little peasant boy won the lottery, even his mother came to
hold the Buddhist world's record of being the laughable "mother of all
incarnations".
Did you see the above quote from Harrer's Seven Years in Tibet? She
had 6 children and three of them were somehow declared "Incarnations
of Buddha". Of course, it is nothing but the most depraved form of
corruption of power known to the world.
You can "Hehehehe :-)" but you have done nothing except to lower your
own credibility. I hope you realize that!
So, Harrer's memoir does provide a little peek into the dark secrets
of the monk-dominated Tibet under Da Lama. It was a shameful history
that has justly been cast out so that all human beings can move forth
on an equal footing.
lo yeeOn
of the monk-dominated Tibet under Da Lama. It was a shameful history
that has justly been cast out so that all human beings can move forth
on an equal footing.
--------
Now let's look at the unethical conduct of the Dalai Lamas... and that
of the U.S. government too! Re: No one is free of Criticism including
China:
In article <7288330.Ssghh1SrV1@Dharma>,
Peter Terpstra <peter.t...@gmail.com> wrote:
>rst9 wrote:
>
>> Why don't you stop lying to serve your own agenda. Anyone is free to
>> travel to Xinjiang and Tibet, go there and see for yourself.
>
>You are not reading the article dear friend, there are no journalists aloud
>there and the reports of HR violations are big.
>Your information runs short by completely trusting CCP propaganda that
>leaves out and distorts a lot.
>
>> 3 were killed included a Chinese student from Shenyang, China, and over 260
>> injured in Boston at the Boston Marath.
>
>That is another very tragic matter, do not use this to whitewash CCP
>crimes, it does not make
>you credible in any way.
>
>No one is free of Criticism including China.
>
>Love, Peter (Neljor)
Don't be sanctimonious and don't distort what the other poster said.
He was only responding to your statement that 21 people were killed in
China's Xinjiang.
You were so rude that you even took out letters from the term "Boston
Marathon". I checked his original follow-up. He had it spelled
correctly. But you are so full of yourself that you mangled his words
and didn't care.
His response to the mention of the Xinjiang terrorist incident was:
> On Tuesday, or so it seems, 21 people were killed in the region of
> Xinjiang in northwest China.
3 were killed included a Chinese student from Shenyang, China, and
over 260 injured in Boston at the Boston Marathon.
Both incidents were domestic terrorism, at least that is how a lot of
people see them.
Both are tragic. And in the case of the Boston Marathon bombings, it
further serves to prove that invading and occupying Afghanistan has
not prevented a terrorist attack from happening in the United States.
The Chechen brothers were boys when they arrived in the States some
ten years ago and Americans troops had already been in Afghanistan by
then. So, destroying the bin Laden training camp did nothing to
prevent the attack against Americans in Libya's Benghazi on 9/11 in
2012 nor did it prevent the Boston bombings this year.
So, why are we still dragging our feet to pull out?
This has to be the most farcical withdrawing in the annals of world
civilization. Is it not a great tragedy that seven American troops
died needlessly when we had all year in 2012 to pull out but instead
the politicians want to stay until the end of 2014 just to reduce the
troops to some 12,000?
A US civilian cargo plane has crashed at Bagram airbase in
Afghanistan, killing its seven crew, officials say.
Why do they have to die? Why?
And then another 8 ISAF soldiers were killed in less than a week
later? Why?
Attacks across Afghanistan kill 8 service members, including at
least 5 Americans
And then there were 3 British soldiers killed in Afghanistan just a
week before. Why?
And then in the same week of the Bagram plane crash that killed 7
Americans, there was another military cargo plane crash taking off
from a base in Kyrgyzstan, trying to bring fuel into Afghanistan,
killing an unknown number of crew members. Why?
These victims lost their lives in Afghanistan because the old men in
Washington lied. Those who died didn't have to die, had enough of us
the people recognized the folly of the Afghan war.
There is no reason to talk up a complete withdrawal from Afghanistan
and then sit on it for three more years before reducing the troop
level to 12,000 men and still keeping Bagram. What kind of
manuevering is that - other than Washington's desire to keep the
airbase in Bagram?
That is a real tragedy that nothing China has done can match.
China has not bombed another country. And China has only wrested
power from the decadent monks and landowners.
China's success in defeating the decadent monks and landowners has
resulted in the freedom of millions of Tibetan serfs who had been
hereditarily enslaved. They were enslaved due to the lies of Tibetan
Buddhism.
The Dalai Lama always reincarnates as Dalai Lama while the serfs die
and reincarnate as worms;
The Dalai Lama is a living Buddha when in reality they love worldly
pleasure and material possessions. Indeed they used 36 people to
carry their sedans and enjoyed an opulent lifestyle at their summer
palaces at Norbulingka - so much so that they sneaked back there
often even when they were supposed to be at their official residence
praying and meditating at Potola.
The Dalai Lamas have perfect knowledge and yet they didn't even have
the foresight to choose a suitable place for their palaces. So they
built the Potola palace which no doubt killed many serfs because of
the difficulty required to build it. And yet the Dalai Lamas hated
the place and so since the 7th Dalai Lama, Norbulingka became their
lust and obsession. They built and built and destroyed the flora
and fauna. They have no doubt killed many snow leopards because
even Da Lama's private tutor from Austria, Herr Heinrich Harrer
witnessed the death of one that wandered into Norbulingka.
The Dalai Lamas were acting like scum bags and were no less
disgusting.
Unfortunately for the Tibetans, former Chinese governments only had
symbolic presence in Tibet because China was starving and occupied by
foreign forces. Only after the CCP won, the serfs were liberated and
now the masses are free to do what they want to do. They don't need
foreigners to incite violence and impose misery on them.
How do I know that? I know because a man with the nom de plume of
Theurang told me. So let's read what I said below.
lo yeeOn
Subject: The Tibetans are smiling and that makes Theurang unhappy! So
where is THeurang's compassion? Re: They treat us like animals By
Theurang (writer)
In article <7167513.oz1WfLRYUc@Dharma>,
Peter Terpstra <peter.t...@gmail.com> wrote:
>"They treat us like animals"
>Tuesday, 7 May 2013
>
>Tashi Rabten (pen name: Theurang) is a Tibetan writer, poet and editor
>who is serving a four-year sentence in Mianyang Prison,
>Sichuan Province. He graduated from North-West University for
>Nationalities and edited the now-banned Tibetan language
>journal "Shar Dungri" and also published "Written in Blood", a
>compilation of his poems, notes and writings on the situation in
>Tibet following the 2008 protests.
>
>In this essay, translated by TCHRD, the writer condemns the cultural
>insensitivity of Chinese tourists and the commercialization
>of Tibetan culture as the number of Chinese tourists continues to rise,
>exerting immense pressure on the fragile ecology and
>landscape of the Tibetan Plateau.
>
>They treat us like animals
Bad title! 'cos it's making a false advertisement.
A reader's normal response to the words "They treat us like animals"
is that of "They treat us badly".
The article below doesn't convey that kind of imagery. It's easy for
an average reader to say that the author is belly-aching. "What's he
complaining about? Tourists giving indigenous people money who are
all too happy to accept? Tourists snapping pictures at anybody in
sight? Tourists sharing the surrounding of monasteries with the
indigenous people? Jeez-Louise, what kind of times are we living in
today? Even if there are no tourists in London or New York, CCTV are
still all over the respective city, constantly monitoring every face
in its sight.
And the news media has just finished praising these CCTV cameras in
Boston for the speed with which the FBI succeeded in identifying the
bombing suspects.
And when you think about it, perhaps these tourist cameras may also
serve as a socially (in addition to the individually) useful function
of capturing the faces of a few potential self-immolation inciters
among the monks near the monasteries. How about that for a win-win
situation?
Also, if you read Heinrich Harrer's Sieben Jahre in Tibet (Seven Years
in Tibet), you'll learn that Da Lama had several expensive telescopes
in his possession. And he had some of them mounted on a balcony at
his Potola Palace residential quarters overlooking the town of Lhasa.
There he enjoyed peering into his telescopes to check out what the
people were doing in their gardens.
Harrer observed that many of Da Lama's subjects would, as soon as they
discovered that they were being watched and studied, quickly remove
themselves from plain view. And they would explain that they didn't
want to "sadden the heart" of their young ruler.
So, we can see that snooping is not a new phenomenon in Tibet. The
only difference is that today a tourist can aim his/her camera at you
if you are on a street while during the years when Da Lama was still
the ruler of Tibet, only he was privileged to watch over your every
moves.
So, Theurang, author of "They treat us like animials", really does not
have a legitimate complaint against either the tourists who have been
flocking to Tibet these days or the Chinese government for promoting
tourism over there.
Actually, the author is quite bitter about his fellow Tibetans who are
all too happy to earn some money by being the locals who know their
way.
What makes me laugh and cry at the same time is to witness the
smiling faces of the Tibetan masses lured by hard cash. . . .
. . . When tourist vehicles arrive, ruddy-faced Tibetan women and
snot-nosed Tibetan boys rush into action with their horses. Holding
their breath, desperation in their eyes, they carry Chinese tourists
on their horses and walk up the mountains. Holding fifty-Yuan notes
in their hands, smiles written all over their faces, they kill their
time waiting for the arrival of other tourists. When I see them, I
wonder how a race that once conquered two-thirds of the world's
territory has now been turned into a bunch of soul-less slaves
serving other people. My dear fellow-countrymen, if we cannot paint
the bones of our ancestors in gold, the least we could do is not to
throw their gray hair in the wind.
But why did the author begrudge the masses for being materialistic
when the Dalai Lamas for generations have been so glad to collect gold
watches, diamond music boxes, all kinds of jewels, and tons and tons
of gold bars and gold coins? Why can't he have a little compassion
and share the joy of his own people whose parents or grandparents were
serfs working in extreme conditions just to have food in the stomach
in the end of the day while the abbots and landowners lived like
kings?
While I can sympathize with Theurang, the author, for his sentimental
yearning for an era that is gone, there is no suggestion whatsoever
that "They treat us like animials".
Actually, the author is extremely confused about that certain "race
that once conquered two-thirds of the world's territory" that, in his
view, "has now been turned into a bunch of soul-less slaves serving
other people". Be a little more kind to your own people and a lot
less assured of your righteousness, will you?
First, as you know from history, there might have been a "race" that
"once conquered two-thirds of the world's territory", if you want to
discount the Americas and Africa as well as much of the rest of the
planet, but it couldn't hold on to much of that territory for even a
hundred years. Part of the reason, about which many historians can
readily agree, is that the Mongols weren't sufficiently sophisticated
to rule that amount of territory, once they got off their horses and
put their swords away.
Second, the Tibetan masses didn't have a chance once they were turned
into serfs serving the monks after the latter figured out how to use
religion to make them superstitious, illiterate, and willing to work
for the ruling class practically for free for their entire lives and
still expect to reincarnate as worms in the next life.
Given the historical context, the Tibetans never had a choice. They
were only liberated when the CCP came and wrested the power from the
landowners and the abbots, and outlawed serfdom and instituted land
reform.
Theurang can fill himself with "anger" and let "resentment boil in"
his own heart. But what he has described lends plenty of support to
the Chinese government's claim that the West's accusation that it
represses the Tibetans is a lie.
China's ruling class has no incentive to repress its minorities
because there are so many of them in substantial numbers. If they do
not repress the Miao or the Manchu, for example, then what motivation
is there for them to selectively repress the Uighurs or Da Lama's
followers, other than the facts that they are terrorists and
treacherous elements in the society who are wilfully working with
foreigners to destabilize the country to cause it to fall apart?
Thanks Theurang, your article does a lot of good to vindicate the
Chinese government - against the lies and distortions from the VOA,
RFA, and the like of BBC News' Damian Grammaticas.
lo yeeOn
>
> By Theurang
>
>During the summer, my homeland is filled with swarms of Chinese
>tourists. The rush of tourists means that elderly Tibetans are having
>difficulties circumambulating the monasteries. Covering their heads
>in robes, monks and nuns stand by gaping at the tourists in silence.
>When I see these images, when I think about them, I suffer from
>intense pain and despair. Anger and resentment boil in my heart.
>Today, under the crushing boots of foreigners, my homeland is
>suffering from degeneration and decay.
>
>Like swarms of ants unleashed by anthills, these increasing number of
>tourists are making preparations to settle themselves permanently on
>our lands. What makes me laugh and cry at the same time is to witness
>the smiling faces of the Tibetan masses lured by hard cash. Even the
>leaders of the nomadic villages have signed contracts to sell their
>lands. In the next two to three years, these visitors who call
>themselves tourists will settle permanently on our lands.
>
>When tourist vehicles arrive, ruddy-faced Tibetan women and
>snot-nosed Tibetan boys rush into action with their horses. Holding
>their breath, desperation in their eyes, they carry Chinese tourists
>on their horses and walk up the mountains. Holding fifty-Yuan notes
>in their hands, smiles written all over their faces, they kill their
>time waiting for the arrival of other tourists. When I see them, I
>wonder how a race that once conquered two-thirds of the world's
>territory has now been turned into a bunch of soul-less slaves
>serving other people. My dear fellow-countrymen, if we cannot paint
>the bones of our ancestors in gold, the least we could do is not to
>throw their gray hair in the wind.
>
>Tourists visiting from surrounding areas carry cameras of different
>sizes in their hands. Crowds of monks, elderly folks and "servicemen"
>bearing horses gape at the tourists when the latter take pictures of
>nomadic villages and rivers. One of the tourists pointed his camera
>at the strange-looking eyes of these Tibetans and took their
>pictures. When I saw this, I wondered:
>
>"When the tourist returns to his place, where would he advertize this
>picture and what sort of caption would he give it?" These thoughts
>gave me intense pain and despair.
>
>Why do these tourists point their cameras on the faces of elderly
>Tibetans and take their pictures? Do these tourists not have a sense
>of ethics and morality? If we turn around and point the camera on
>their faces and take their pictures, wouldn't they run away from us
>saying we are violating their rights? The fact that they keep taking
>pictures of our people, our mountains and our villages "despite
>knowing that such actions are unethical, immoral and illegal" clearly
>shows what kind of status our people enjoy. They treat us like
>animals lacking the ability of speech. They treat us as wage laborers
>who could be swayed in any direction by the lure of hard cash. They
>treat us as a race of ignorant barbarians. My dear fellow countrymen,
>as the saying goes, if sons fail to inherit the legacy of forefathers
>or if the thread fails to inherit the legacy of needles, others would
>keep trampling on our heads.
>
>What would happen if you visit a Chinese city and randomly point your
>camera on the face of a Chinese and take his picture? What
>consequences would you have to bear if you selfishly take pictures of
>homes, belongings and other precious objects of a city? How would the
>whip of laws chase you away if you trample upon the rights and
>liberties of people living in a city? Why can't the standards of law
>and ethics of the cities be applied equally in our nomadic
>grasslands? Why can't camera-holding tourists riding in cars and
>masses on horses enjoy equal status if human rights have a universal
>resonance? Like in the cities, why can't we put up signboards in
>nomadic grasslands declaring, "Taking pictures, peeing and spitting
>are strictly prohibited here!"
>
>http://www.tchrd.org/2013/05/they-treat-us-like-animals/
lo yeeOn
May 11, 2013, 9:45:36 PM5/11/13
to
In article <518c31f3....@news.giganews.com>, <hab...@anony.net> wrote:
>That is no excuse to take over their country and make them a minority
>as China is doing in Tibet , Xin Jiang and Inner Mongolia
But your statement indicates that you are very, very confused.
>That is no excuse to take over their country and make them a minority
>as China is doing in Tibet , Xin Jiang and Inner Mongolia
Given my subject line, your single sentence response begins with the
impression that you were talking about Tibet being taken over when you
talked about "their country". But when you started talking about
making "them a minority", you are comparing them also with A, B, and
C, where A = Tibet, B = Xin Jiang, and C = Inner Mongolia.
So, it appears that you were comparing A with A and B and C.
While it may be logical admissible, it does not make sense to compare
A with A in a linguistic context where words are conveyed to mean
something for communication purposes. It is especially true when A
does not compare well with B or C.
While A can vacuously compare with A itself, it contributes to no
information.
A does not compare well with B because ethnic Tibetans remain the
majority of the TAR while it is possible that ethnic Han Chinese are
getting to be comparable in numbers to the Uighurs.
A also does not compare well with C because there is not a comparable
ethnic struggle in Inner Mongolia.
Furthermore, the critical issue of political importance is that A and
B and C have all been a part of China long before the communist took
over. Just compare the map of China in the Qing dynasty (for nearly
three hundred years of history) with the current one and compare the
map of the Republic of China (1911-1949) with the current Chinese map,
and you will see that the current map contains no more territory than
its two predecessors. In fact, the ROC claimed Outer Mongolia as its
own, which is a large piece of land, just as its predecessor but China
does not. But all of them claim A, B, and C as part of its territory.
So, there is no basis to talk about China "taking over" A, or B, or C,
regardless of the ethnic composition in those areas.
As to ethnic composition in any region in the world, it changes all
the time. As long as sovereignty is not a question, there is no basis
for a complaint about ethnic composition, unless you do not believe in
the freedom of movement within a country.
In the US, ethnic composition changes rapidly in recent years. Only
petty sour grapes type would complain about hispanic population to
become the majority in such and such a state.
Of course, the US killed all the American Indians to become what it is
today. China has not pursued such a policy. There is no evidence
that China's policy in Tibet is meant to harm ethnic Tibetans. It is
pure VOA, RFA type propaganda in collaboration with Da Lama and his
TGIE cohorts.
Now consider the fact that some Tibetans count the Mongols as their
forebears and thus lamented the loss of its past glory. So, a legit
question is to ask how did they manage to loss that glory?
My guess is you can't blame the CCP for robbing it from the Mongols or
the Tibetan lamas. While Mongols couldn't hold its far-flung empire
for more than some four scores and x number of years, the Tibetan
lamas stayed alive only by agreeing to be somebody else's vassel or
tributory state.
Of course, the Chinese suffered their own humiliation before the whole
world when Imperial Japan and colonialist from the West entered China
at will and carved up its prime real estate along the coasts. And
when a group of Chinese believe that they could fight off the invaders
with their fists together with their righteousness, they got shot dead
right away or if they got captured, their heads got chopped off by the
imperial Japanese soldiers' swords and were recorded for history books.
At least the intellectuals among the Chinese people at the time knew
what was wrong. They looked inside themselves. And they fought their
way out.
But let's focus on these three groups that existed in China: the
Tibetans under the lamas, the Nationalists soldiers, and the
Communists along with their peasant ally. We know that the lives of
the lamas were extremely decadent while the masses were illiterate and
relentlessly exploited. (In Heinrich Harrer's Seven Years in Tibet,
he recounted the first dinner he was invited to have dinner with the
"Holy Mother", i.e., the mother of Da Lama and the record-holder of
being the mother of the largest number of Incarnations, he counted 40
dishes at the banquet of many guests. And this was happening among
the Tibetans in the "noble class" while the masses had to work from
morning to dark, panting and moaning at the hard work they had to do
to survive. Tibet under the Lamas was clearly heading to trouble
because the system was so inequitable.) And we also know that the
Nationalist under Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek was getting
U.S. military and economic aide to fight the communists. But who were
supplying the communist guerrilla soldiers? Hardly no one, except may
be the Soviet Union. They might have given them so rifles, grenades,
and ammunition. Mostly, on a one-on-one basis, they were poorly
equipped and could not have fought off the Nationalists, not to defeat
them.
The fact, that the communist's successful takeover of China, with
little fighting, shows that they won by the force of logic - not by
force of luck.
So, of course, the Nationalists could afford only token presence in
Tibet despite their assertion of sovereignty over it. But the
decadence of the lamas shows through because they thought they had
nothing to worry about when the world was actually passing them by.
But if anyone fails to see that the complaints from Tibet today mostly
come from the monks. Of course, they complain. They lost their past
glory and the last vestige of influence of the masses.
But there is no objective reason why the corrupt monk system should
not be replaced by an egalitarian one - which the communists brought
in and eventually imposed.
China's current position in Tibet did not arise from a vacuum. It is
particularly not a result of some evil doing, despite western
rhetoric. China was able to go in because the lamas system had rotten
to the core. If it was a matter of brute force, China would have been
kicked out like Nazi Germany was kicked out after losing some 26
million lives fighting their invaders. And if China was using
overwhelming force like the U.S. has been using in Afghanistan and
Iraq, then China would still be spending tens of billions hiring
military contractors to replace the departing US troops. China has
none of the problems of either Nazi Germany or the US/NATO in their
foreign adventure. Perhaps, there is a couple of reasons for that.
One, Tibet had a rotten system that had to be replaced.
Second, Tibet is not a foreign land that China is wasting billions to
subdue with bomb, missiles, bullets, military contractors and tens of
millions of dollars of bribes to a puppet government.
For sure, China still has a Tibet problem. But as long as the U.S. is
spending a few billions each year to destabilize China through Tibet,
and to a lesser extent, Xinjiang, then China has to spend some money
to fight that off. But Tibet is not China's Afghanistan or Iraq.
lo yeeOn
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: So, let's look at the unethical conduct of the Dalai
Lamas... and that of the U.S. government too! Re: No one is free of
Criticism including China.
Peter Terpstra
May 12, 2013, 6:47:51 AM5/12/13
to
lo yeeOn wrote:
> Explain how Tibet evolved from its Genghis Khan days of glory to a time
> when the CIA's modern weapons and logistics could not help Da Lama and his
> troops to resist the PLA for more than a few weeks - something was rotten
> in Potala Palace with the lamas! Re: The Dark Ages in Tibet under the rule
Take Care dear friend, Peter
> Explain how Tibet evolved from its Genghis Khan days of glory to a time
> when the CIA's modern weapons and logistics could not help Da Lama and his
> troops to resist the PLA for more than a few weeks - something was rotten
> in Potala Palace with the lamas! Re: The Dark Ages in Tibet under the rule
> of the Lamas are thankfully gone
If you internet is not blocked by China's firewall you can find all (non CCP based) information there.
Take Care dear friend, Peter
rst9
May 12, 2013, 10:05:45 AM5/12/13
to
so we can block off all Peter the Dutch idiot's posts.
>
> Take Care dear friend, Peter
The Progressive Voice
May 15, 2013, 2:44:07 PM5/15/13
to
On May 11, 6:45 pm, acous...@panix.com (lo yeeOn) wrote:
There is no evidence that the degree of exploitation prevelant in
china was the same in Tibet. Remember Tibet outloawed the death
penalty in 1912.
CCP would allow Tibetans in the Government.
> died needlessly when ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
china was the same in Tibet. Remember Tibet outloawed the death
penalty in 1912.
>
> One, Tibet had a rotten system that had to be replaced.
As usual you are a mouth piece for Communist imperialism.
> One, Tibet had a rotten system that had to be replaced.
>
> Second, Tibet is not a foreign land that China is wasting billions to
> subdue with bomb, missiles, bullets, military contractors and tens of
> millions of dollars of bribes to a puppet government.
If Tibet was being governed for the benefit of the Tibetans than The
> Second, Tibet is not a foreign land that China is wasting billions to
> subdue with bomb, missiles, bullets, military contractors and tens of
> millions of dollars of bribes to a puppet government.
CCP would allow Tibetans in the Government.
>
> For sure, China still has a Tibet problem. But as long as the U.S. is
> spending a few billions each year to destabilize China through Tibet,
> and to a lesser extent, Xinjiang, then China has to spend some money
> to fight that off. But Tibet is not China's Afghanistan or Iraq.
>
> lo yeeOn
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Subject: So, let's look at the unethical conduct of the Dalai
> Lamas... and that of the U.S. government too! Re: No one is free of
> Criticism including China.
>
> In article <7288330.Ssghh1SrV1@Dharma>,
> For sure, China still has a Tibet problem. But as long as the U.S. is
> spending a few billions each year to destabilize China through Tibet,
> and to a lesser extent, Xinjiang, then China has to spend some money
> to fight that off. But Tibet is not China's Afghanistan or Iraq.
>
> lo yeeOn
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Subject: So, let's look at the unethical conduct of the Dalai
> Lamas... and that of the U.S. government too! Re: No one is free of
> Criticism including China.
>
> In article <7288330.Ssghh1SrV1@Dharma>,
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Wusong
May 15, 2013, 2:56:11 PM5/15/13
to
On May 15, 11:44 am, The Progressive Voice <thomaswheat1...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Your whole life has been NOTHING but wild guesses, wrong assumptions,
and infantile insults at people who don't share your ignorant views.
That is why you need consolation from an alien "mystic" who promises a
better life than the miserable one you are living.
Proof that you, Tom Jigme Wheat, aka "The Progressive Voice", are a
LIAR - nothing you say is of any value:
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.china/msg/b4c22582a068309e?hl=en
On the 17th of February, 2011, you accused me of advocating the
overthrow of American democracy, and "just a loud mouth with a one
inch rice dick":
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.politics.tibet/msg/3535c4db40a011...
I have since then asked you to prove it and you couldn't. All you
could do was beat around the bush and assume:
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.china/msg/555a9caec9d9e24b...
making further accusations: "that makes you a foreign agent of the CCP
in my book. If your here on a visa it will be soon revoked":
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.china/msg/f7d716c7958c0743...
, knowing full-well That I am an American and that I support the
American democracy in the USA:
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.china/msg/8e211f9563fe6443...
.
On the 5th of March, 2011, you finally admitted:
"I cant prove that you want to see america overthrown"
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.china/msg/eca9ae060e064bc3...
You are so dumb that you didn't even know the United States has
different time zones:
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.china/msg/9353ea9cd1e264ba...
When confronted again, all you could say was "go suck up to your
racist friend house nigger"
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.china/msg/4da8eea9e620ae9e...
You yourself have thus proven that you are a LIAR!
Quod erat demonstrandum.
wrote:
> There is no evidence that the degree of exploitation prevelant in
> china was the same in Tibet.
(remainder of troll post trash snipped)
> china was the same in Tibet.
Your whole life has been NOTHING but wild guesses, wrong assumptions,
and infantile insults at people who don't share your ignorant views.
That is why you need consolation from an alien "mystic" who promises a
better life than the miserable one you are living.
Proof that you, Tom Jigme Wheat, aka "The Progressive Voice", are a
LIAR - nothing you say is of any value:
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.china/msg/b4c22582a068309e?hl=en
On the 17th of February, 2011, you accused me of advocating the
overthrow of American democracy, and "just a loud mouth with a one
inch rice dick":
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.politics.tibet/msg/3535c4db40a011...
I have since then asked you to prove it and you couldn't. All you
could do was beat around the bush and assume:
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.china/msg/555a9caec9d9e24b...
making further accusations: "that makes you a foreign agent of the CCP
in my book. If your here on a visa it will be soon revoked":
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.china/msg/f7d716c7958c0743...
, knowing full-well That I am an American and that I support the
American democracy in the USA:
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.china/msg/8e211f9563fe6443...
.
On the 5th of March, 2011, you finally admitted:
"I cant prove that you want to see america overthrown"
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.china/msg/eca9ae060e064bc3...
You are so dumb that you didn't even know the United States has
different time zones:
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.china/msg/9353ea9cd1e264ba...
When confronted again, all you could say was "go suck up to your
racist friend house nigger"
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.china/msg/4da8eea9e620ae9e...
You yourself have thus proven that you are a LIAR!
Quod erat demonstrandum.
and/or www.mantra.com/jai
May 15, 2013, 3:21:56 PM5/15/13
to
In article <3822638.IuC11lHnEj@Dharma>,
Peter Terpstra <peter.terpst...@gmail.com> posted:
[
[ "What is the Secret Behind 'Secret Tibet'?"
[ On Weibo, the Chinese version of Twitter, on the other
[ hand, at the same pace at which the TV series was aired -
[ - four episodes per evening -- fierce criticism flooded
[ A different Tibetan wrote but did not finish his
[
[ There were also a few Han Chinese who left critical
[ I also wanted to join the discussion on Weibo. But the
[ I paid attention to some details: a Khenpo passes on the
[ A fairly well-known Chinese nationalist revealed some
[ When faced with all the criticism and sarcasm by
[ The founder of the Tibetan Communist Party, Phuntsog
[ For common Tibetan people, these kinds of accusations
[ Hence, for many other people, this political big-stick is
[
[ For this I must really congratulate the director, by
[ What does surprise me a little, however, is the young
[
[ February 5, 2013
[
[ http://highpeakspureearth.com/2013/what-is-the-secret-behind-secret-tibet-by-woeser/
Interesting article. Dhanyavaad for poting it.
Peter Terpstra <peter.terpst...@gmail.com> posted:
[
[ "What is the Secret Behind 'Secret Tibet'?"
[
[ By Woeser
[
[ Last month, CCTV 8 continuously broadcast the 46 episodes
[ of "Secret Tibet", a TV series produced under the
[ guidance of high officials involved with Tibet. The
[ producer, Changlochen Tsewang Yonten confidently
[ expressed that this series would not only win the highest
[ "government award", the "Flying Goddess Award", but will
[ also be sold to foreign countries because its selling
[ point was "Tibetans talking about Tibet"
[
[ By Woeser
[
[ Last month, CCTV 8 continuously broadcast the 46 episodes
[ of "Secret Tibet", a TV series produced under the
[ guidance of high officials involved with Tibet. The
[ producer, Changlochen Tsewang Yonten confidently
[ expressed that this series would not only win the highest
[ "government award", the "Flying Goddess Award", but will
[ also be sold to foreign countries because its selling
[ point was "Tibetans talking about Tibet"
[ On Weibo, the Chinese version of Twitter, on the other
[ hand, at the same pace at which the TV series was aired -
[ - four episodes per evening -- fierce criticism flooded
[ in by Tibetan audiences. The following comment by a
[ Tibetan hits the target: "In this soap opera, prayers for
[ the elimination of obstacles was portrayed like an order
[ given by Ramoche to aristocrats for implementation The
[ Tibetan hits the target: "In this soap opera, prayers for
[ the elimination of obstacles was portrayed like an order
[ demonized and distorted description of the usage of human
[ skins and menstrual blood is once again presented on
[ stage by the ignorant script-writer to show the darkness
[ and cruelness of the old Tibet. The whole plot is nothing
[ more than the typical cliche found in Chinese fast-food
[ soap operas accompanied with some political propaganda.
[ This is the so-called "Tibetans talking about Tibet"
[ propagated by the producer @TsewangYonten. You are so
[ sophisticated, and sensible
[
[ skins and menstrual blood is once again presented on
[ stage by the ignorant script-writer to show the darkness
[ and cruelness of the old Tibet. The whole plot is nothing
[ more than the typical cliche found in Chinese fast-food
[ soap operas accompanied with some political propaganda.
[ This is the so-called "Tibetans talking about Tibet"
[ propagated by the producer @TsewangYonten. You are so
[ sophisticated, and sensible
[ A different Tibetan wrote but did not finish his
[ thoughts: "'Secret Tibet' in which Tibetans talk about
[ Tibet: the director and the screenwriter are not Tibetan,
[ 80% of the main actors are not Tibetan; some of the very
[ good local actors are not involved..., if this 'lack of
[ Tibet: the director and the screenwriter are not Tibetan,
[ 80% of the main actors are not Tibetan; some of the very
[ love for the Plateau' sets out to present Tibetan
[ history, culture and customs, I am afraid that it will
[ only mislead even more people..."
[ history, culture and customs, I am afraid that it will
[
[ There were also a few Han Chinese who left critical
[ comments: "CCTV 8 is broadcasting 'Secret Tibet', it
[ explains Tibetan beliefs from a Han Chinese perspective,
[ Han Chinese are frank; but I don't know if the Tibetans
[ from the land of Buddhism are willing to accept the ideas
[ of the Propaganda Department. Official reasons aside,
[ ultimately the reason why they don't let Tibet become
[ independent is because it is for their own advantage,
[ there is no need to do any whitewashing, just respect
[ people and it's ok." "I watched this series by chance,
[ but when I saw it I was embarrassed, the indiscriminately
[ copied storyline tried to conceal the hundreds of
[ historical loopholes, the general tone of this
[ documentary is obvious; if you watch too much your body
[ will heat up, you will get sick, so I advise people who
[ are watching it to take medicine."
[
[ So, how about comparing this to the red film classic
[ "Serf", an example of the demonisation of Tibet? I
[ planned to keep some evenings free to watch a few
[ episodes of "Secret Tibet", but I just couldn't, in the
[ end I always felt sick so I ended up only intermittently
[ watching some of them. And indeed, great historical
[ incidences as well as small actions of common people were
[ all presented as if they were without mistake, as if they
[ had not been tampered with, as if there were almost no
[ errors at all "I would say it is even worse than 'Serf'.
[ explains Tibetan beliefs from a Han Chinese perspective,
[ Han Chinese are frank; but I don't know if the Tibetans
[ from the land of Buddhism are willing to accept the ideas
[ of the Propaganda Department. Official reasons aside,
[ ultimately the reason why they don't let Tibet become
[ independent is because it is for their own advantage,
[ there is no need to do any whitewashing, just respect
[ people and it's ok." "I watched this series by chance,
[ but when I saw it I was embarrassed, the indiscriminately
[ copied storyline tried to conceal the hundreds of
[ historical loopholes, the general tone of this
[ documentary is obvious; if you watch too much your body
[ will heat up, you will get sick, so I advise people who
[ are watching it to take medicine."
[
[ So, how about comparing this to the red film classic
[ "Serf", an example of the demonisation of Tibet? I
[ planned to keep some evenings free to watch a few
[ episodes of "Secret Tibet", but I just couldn't, in the
[ end I always felt sick so I ended up only intermittently
[ watching some of them. And indeed, great historical
[ incidences as well as small actions of common people were
[ all presented as if they were without mistake, as if they
[ had not been tampered with, as if there were almost no
[ The advisors of the documentary were all from Changlochen
[ Tsewang Yonten's family It is said that they normally
[ showed a certain degree of awareness, so were they drawn
[ into this by force or did they do it for their own
[ advantage? But then again, when Yin Fatang and the
[ Propaganda Department join forces, what is there to
[ expect?"
[
[ This is what the son of a family whose stories had been
[ completely transformed by the documentary wrote to me
[
[ into this by force or did they do it for their own
[ advantage? But then again, when Yin Fatang and the
[ Propaganda Department join forces, what is there to
[ expect?"
[
[ This is what the son of a family whose stories had been
[ completely transformed by the documentary wrote to me
[ I also wanted to join the discussion on Weibo. But the
[ comment function of my Weibo account has already been
[ blocked for the past half a year, all I can do is read
[ what other people write. But I still told my opinions to
[ Changlochen Tsewang Yonten, as well as to the director
[ and screenplay writer Liu Debin, but none of them
[ replied, perhaps they never saw my message, so let me
[ post it here:
[
[ This series was written with very clear intentions, it is
[ a series full of distortions and deformations. Its
[ attitude is actually very arrogant, showing that the
[ producers behind the scenes hardly understand real
[ history, that they hardly understand the many people who
[ have passed away, the many contemporary witnesses and
[ their descendants. The people that are being portrayed
[ were originally all part of Lhasa's aristocracy. The
[ producers humiliate Lhasa's former aristocracy and its
[ descendants in a totally arrogant way
[
[ blocked for the past half a year, all I can do is read
[ what other people write. But I still told my opinions to
[ Changlochen Tsewang Yonten, as well as to the director
[ and screenplay writer Liu Debin, but none of them
[ replied, perhaps they never saw my message, so let me
[ post it here:
[
[ This series was written with very clear intentions, it is
[ a series full of distortions and deformations. Its
[ attitude is actually very arrogant, showing that the
[ producers behind the scenes hardly understand real
[ history, that they hardly understand the many people who
[ have passed away, the many contemporary witnesses and
[ their descendants. The people that are being portrayed
[ were originally all part of Lhasa's aristocracy. The
[ producers humiliate Lhasa's former aristocracy and its
[ descendants in a totally arrogant way
[ I paid attention to some details: a Khenpo passes on the
[ imperial edict of Reting Regent to some aristocrat, the
[ first sentence is: Prostrating in front of the Nanjing
[ President, the natural reincarnation of Manjushri; the
[ second sentence is: Prostrating in front of Dorje Chang,
[ the Dalai Lama. This single detail already suffices to
[ see the entire picture. The series very much resembles
[ all those so-called art works about Tibet being produced
[ by the Party, real history is being erased and distorted
[ and then the gaps are being filled with the content that
[ they want to convey. It is just new wine in old bottles,
[ it is all the same I believe that it was not really
[ first sentence is: Prostrating in front of the Nanjing
[ President, the natural reincarnation of Manjushri; the
[ second sentence is: Prostrating in front of Dorje Chang,
[ the Dalai Lama. This single detail already suffices to
[ see the entire picture. The series very much resembles
[ all those so-called art works about Tibet being produced
[ by the Party, real history is being erased and distorted
[ and then the gaps are being filled with the content that
[ they want to convey. It is just new wine in old bottles,
[ Changlochen Tsewang Yonten who invested money in "Secret
[ Tibet", it was the big boss who simply had to use
[ Changlochen's name. Otherwise how could they claim that
[ it is "Tibetans speaking about Tibet"? The United Front
[ Work Department's drama group called "Yi Duo" had
[ pretended to personify "Tibetans speak about Tibet" but
[ they had been uncovered so now they could only send
[ Changlochen Tsewang Yonten, a descendent of the
[ aristocracy, who was obviously also generously rewarded
[
[ Tibet", it was the big boss who simply had to use
[ Changlochen's name. Otherwise how could they claim that
[ it is "Tibetans speaking about Tibet"? The United Front
[ Work Department's drama group called "Yi Duo" had
[ pretended to personify "Tibetans speak about Tibet" but
[ they had been uncovered so now they could only send
[ Changlochen Tsewang Yonten, a descendent of the
[ aristocracy, who was obviously also generously rewarded
[ A fairly well-known Chinese nationalist revealed some
[ information on Weibo: "It is said that when 'Secret
[ Tibet' was checked by the censors, a local Tibetan cadre
[ agitatedly said that us and the Tibetan separatists have
[ not had any struggle with guns and knives for so many
[ years, but this documentary will give us knives and
[ guns..." Yes, "Tibetans talking about Tibet", those are
[ Tibet' was checked by the censors, a local Tibetan cadre
[ agitatedly said that us and the Tibetan separatists have
[ not had any struggle with guns and knives for so many
[ years, but this documentary will give us knives and
[ the guns and knives that the country's Propaganda
[ Department uses through the nationalist platform called
[ CCTV to attack people
[
[ Department uses through the nationalist platform called
[ CCTV to attack people
[ When faced with all the criticism and sarcasm by
[ netizens, Changlochen Tsewang Yonten who normally
[ actually likes to show off on Weibo, completely avoided
[ the internet. Liu Debin (online he is introduced as
[ "associate Professor at the Literature Department of the
[ Beijing Film Institute, Postgraduate academic supervisor,
[ famous editor"), on the contrary, was unable to bear it.
[ He stated that he was going to write a second part of
[ "Secret Tibet", he spat out: "I will definitely write it,
[ make all these contemptible scoundrels shouting out
[ separatism disappear". These political labels are scary!
[ This political big-stick is vicious!
[
[ What needs to be known is that over the past few years,
[ above the heads of Tibetans (not only Tibetans but also
[ Uyghurs, Mongolians and other so-called "ethnic
[ minorities") has been hanging a large knife labelled
[ "separatist", and once it is dropped it may mean death.
[ "Separatist" is not just any kind of insignificant
[ accusation. It means "overturning a regime", "fighting
[ for independence" and "betrayal of one's own country".
[ And the consequences of such actions are arrest, a prison
[ sentence, even complete disappearance or some time
[ before, it would mean a public trial and being executed
[ by firing squad. There are too many such cases
[
[ actually likes to show off on Weibo, completely avoided
[ the internet. Liu Debin (online he is introduced as
[ "associate Professor at the Literature Department of the
[ Beijing Film Institute, Postgraduate academic supervisor,
[ famous editor"), on the contrary, was unable to bear it.
[ He stated that he was going to write a second part of
[ "Secret Tibet", he spat out: "I will definitely write it,
[ make all these contemptible scoundrels shouting out
[ separatism disappear". These political labels are scary!
[ This political big-stick is vicious!
[
[ What needs to be known is that over the past few years,
[ above the heads of Tibetans (not only Tibetans but also
[ Uyghurs, Mongolians and other so-called "ethnic
[ minorities") has been hanging a large knife labelled
[ "separatist", and once it is dropped it may mean death.
[ "Separatist" is not just any kind of insignificant
[ accusation. It means "overturning a regime", "fighting
[ for independence" and "betrayal of one's own country".
[ And the consequences of such actions are arrest, a prison
[ sentence, even complete disappearance or some time
[ before, it would mean a public trial and being executed
[ by firing squad. There are too many such cases
[ The founder of the Tibetan Communist Party, Phuntsog
[ Wangyal, was in 1960 put into the most important
[ political prison --Qicheng Prison -- for 18 years. He was
[ believed to "possess local democratic beliefs" and to
[ want to fight for "Tibetan independence". The 10th
[ Panchen Lama was denounced by various general assemblies
[ and also imprisoned in Qicheng Prison for 10 years,
[ because he had written a "70,000 Character Petition" to
[ Mao Zedong and was thus accused of "being against the
[ people, against socialism and was plotting an armed
[ rebellion"
[
[ want to fight for "Tibetan independence". The 10th
[ Panchen Lama was denounced by various general assemblies
[ and also imprisoned in Qicheng Prison for 10 years,
[ because he had written a "70,000 Character Petition" to
[ Mao Zedong and was thus accused of "being against the
[ people, against socialism and was plotting an armed
[ rebellion"
[ For common Tibetan people, these kinds of accusations
[ represent a crowning calamity. For minority cadres
[ working within the system, these accusations are phrased
[ slightly less direct, like "someone entertains an ethnic
[ consciousness", but they still mean that minority cadres
[ have "bad luck"; only if they completely ignore their own
[ conscience, can they really protect themselves. I
[ remember when I was working for the Tibetan Literary and
[ Arts Circle, the Tibetan who was holding the post of the
[ Party Secretary of our group was unable to be promoted
[ because it was said that he "entertained an ethnic
[ consciousness". I myself was fired because I had written
[ a collection of essays, in which I was accused of "making
[ political errors"
[
[ working within the system, these accusations are phrased
[ slightly less direct, like "someone entertains an ethnic
[ consciousness", but they still mean that minority cadres
[ have "bad luck"; only if they completely ignore their own
[ conscience, can they really protect themselves. I
[ remember when I was working for the Tibetan Literary and
[ Arts Circle, the Tibetan who was holding the post of the
[ Party Secretary of our group was unable to be promoted
[ because it was said that he "entertained an ethnic
[ consciousness". I myself was fired because I had written
[ a collection of essays, in which I was accused of "making
[ political errors"
[ Hence, for many other people, this political big-stick is
[ extremely effective, easy to operate and very beneficial.
[ Phuntsog Wangyal describes it like this: "eat non-
[ separatist food, promote non-separatist officials, give
[ Phuntsog Wangyal describes it like this: "eat non-
[ out non-separatist rewards". The director of "Secret
[ Tibet", Liu Debin claims that he understands Tibet very
[ well, that he has been to Tibet many times and thus
[ deeply penetrated Tibetan life, yet, he evidently uses
[ this so-called understanding to fight against the
[ "unwritten laws" of Tibet and to develop a political big-
[ stick especially designed for Tibetans
[ Tibet", Liu Debin claims that he understands Tibet very
[ well, that he has been to Tibet many times and thus
[ deeply penetrated Tibetan life, yet, he evidently uses
[ this so-called understanding to fight against the
[ "unwritten laws" of Tibet and to develop a political big-
[
[ For this I must really congratulate the director, by
[ means of this kind of work of art, he did not only manage
[ to find "hostile external forces" for the Party, but is
[ also ready to catch some "scoundrels who want to split
[ the motherland". Liu is also very skilled at maintaining
[ relationships, he is able to resort to an assorted
[ assembly of "famous directors, literary critics and
[ Tibetologists" or other insiders who are ready to sing
[ songs in praise of him. What may his future look like? He
[ will not only be sure to once again receive the "Flying
[ Goddess Award" but he will probably also take over the
[ throne of the President of the
[
[ Beijing Film Institute; it would not surprise me at all
[
[ to find "hostile external forces" for the Party, but is
[ also ready to catch some "scoundrels who want to split
[ the motherland". Liu is also very skilled at maintaining
[ relationships, he is able to resort to an assorted
[ assembly of "famous directors, literary critics and
[ Tibetologists" or other insiders who are ready to sing
[ songs in praise of him. What may his future look like? He
[ will not only be sure to once again receive the "Flying
[ Goddess Award" but he will probably also take over the
[ throne of the President of the
[
[ Beijing Film Institute; it would not surprise me at all
[ What does surprise me a little, however, is the young
[ Tibetan people's persistence and brilliance. Yesterday,
[ for example, a few Tibetan singers calling themselves
[ "Sheep Droppings" dedicated their song "Respect" to the
[ cast and crew of "Secret Tibet" on the Chinese video
[ website Youku; they rapped in Mandarin with occasional
[ Tibetan and English additions to remind the director, Mr.
[ big-stick Liu: "...This isn't about independence or
[ for example, a few Tibetan singers calling themselves
[ "Sheep Droppings" dedicated their song "Respect" to the
[ cast and crew of "Secret Tibet" on the Chinese video
[ website Youku; they rapped in Mandarin with occasional
[ Tibetan and English additions to remind the director, Mr.
[ separatism, this is about respect; We don't need you to
[ change history or change the facts ... Again and again
[ you defame our people! You are just a clown, even if this
[ is a grand conspiracy. Don't infringe on and slander
[ Tibet's thousands of years of history ... Distorting
[ is a grand conspiracy. Don't infringe on and slander
[ history shows what you want, that you want a false
[ reality. Knowing the real history only reveals our
[ people's intrinsic quality. Kawachen's people are not
[ weeping snow lions. The disgraceful show compiled by
[ those without belief, where did you find these stories'
[ origins?"
[
[ Indeed, where did they find all this original material
[ that allows them to simply revise history and lead a
[ murderous crusade against dissenting views? Within only
[ one day, this rap song was "harmonised" while "Secret
[ Tibet" that causes so much disharmony is being praised
[ highly
[ reality. Knowing the real history only reveals our
[ people's intrinsic quality. Kawachen's people are not
[ weeping snow lions. The disgraceful show compiled by
[ those without belief, where did you find these stories'
[ origins?"
[
[ Indeed, where did they find all this original material
[ that allows them to simply revise history and lead a
[ murderous crusade against dissenting views? Within only
[ one day, this rap song was "harmonised" while "Secret
[ Tibet" that causes so much disharmony is being praised
[
[ February 5, 2013
[
[ http://highpeakspureearth.com/2013/what-is-the-secret-behind-secret-tibet-by-woeser/
Interesting article. Dhanyavaad for poting it.
lo yeeOn
May 15, 2013, 5:56:39 PM5/15/13
to
>That is no excuse to take over their country and make them a minority
>as China is doing in Tibet , Xin Jiang and Inner Mongolia
>as China is doing in Tibet , Xin Jiang and Inner Mongolia
Tibet despite their assertion of sovereignty over it. But the
decadence of the lamas shows through because they thought they had
nothing to worry about when the world was actually passing them by.
But everyone should be able to see that the complaints concerning the
decadence of the lamas shows through because they thought they had
nothing to worry about when the world was actually passing them by.
way Tibet is governed today mostly come from the monks. Of course,
they complain. They have lost their past glory and the last vestige
of influence of the masses.
But there is no objective reason as to why the corrupt monk system
should not be replaced by an egalitarian one - which the communists
brought in and eventually imposed.
China's current position in Tibet did not arise from a vacuum. It is
particularly not a result of some evil doing on China's part, despite
brought in and eventually imposed.
China's current position in Tibet did not arise from a vacuum. It is
western rhetoric. China was able to go in because the lamas system
had rotted to the core. If Tibet were a reasonable "country" and if
it were a matter of brute force on the Chinese communists' part, they
would have been kicked out like Nazi Germany was kicked out from the
Soviet Union after some 26 million Soviet lives had been lost
resisting or fighting the Nazi invaders.
And if China were using overwhelming force like the U.S. has been
using in Afghanistan and Iraq to gain control of the countries, then
China would still be spending billions, if not tens of billions, per
month hiring military contractors to replace the departing US troops.
China has none of the problems of either Nazi Germany or the US/NATO
is under Chinese occupation. And there are also strong reasons for
that.
First, Tibet had a rotten system that had to be replaced and millions
who needed to be liberated from the lamas and the landowners. And
have had a glimpse into that unspeakably dark past of that region when
the non-producing lamas ran amok in Heinricc Harrer's Seven Years of
Tibet. And many Tibetans today can attest to the social progress made
in the region. In fact, Harrer gave examples of the cruelty he had
personally witnessed, including cases in which he thought were more
inhumane than the death penalty.
As for the perception that substantive progress has actually been made
in Tibet, I will quote Cui Yuying, a contemporary Tibetan Chinese who
tells us that the lamas politics should remain buried in the past.
(See article attached below).
Second, Tibet has never been a foreign land that China had to enter
and waste billions after billions on just trying to subdue. No air
raid in the stealth of night, no missiles, no bullets, no military
contractors and tens of millions of dollars of bribes to a puppet
government.
Third, when the communists overthrew the Nationalist government in
government.
1949, they had to send troops into every province in China to assert
control. That means the populous Guangdong province in the south,
that means the desert-like Xinjiang province in the northwest, and
that means Tibet in the far west - remember that Tibet was a province
in the time of the Republic of China just as Guangdong and Xinjiang
were provinces.
There are several misconceptions in the Tibetan issue the West has
concocted and nurtured through its propaganda machine:
1) Some behavior of some monks in Tibet (the media is able to capture)
means the same behavior for all Tibetans (if they are given the chance
- which is that all are for the Dalai Lama and all are against China).
In fact many Tibetans, like Cui Yuhing, have no desire to surrender
their current way of life to a lama-dominated society or a society
dominated by lamas as puppet of some foreign power and do not welcome
the return of the Dalai Lama.
2) Tibet was an independent country until the communists took over
China and entered Tibet - it has been "occupied" by China ever since.
If it were true, then Tibet would have been a member of the UN which
was formed in 1945 under the U.S.'s leadership - keep in mind that the
communists were still four years away from defeating the Nationalists.
The truth is since 1644 at the founding of the Qing dynasty and
through out the decades of Nationalist rule from 1911-1949, Tibet was
a "province" of China. Just check all the relevant Chinese maps to
convince yourself of this unintrovertible fact! Tibet has for
hundreds of years a part of China.
And if the Tibetans were unhappy with the Chinese rule, they should
have done something about it. But they never did. The lamas and
landowners enjoyed massively decadent lives with most the province's
wealth at their disposal while the masses live in abject proverty and
despair. The ruling class was outwardly hostile to technology and
progress, according to Harrer. It was able to do that for two
reasons: i) it was a different time when Tibet was hard to reach so
that the ruling class could exploit the masses with impunity; and ii)
the lamas have successfully beaten a massively false belief system
into the brains of the masses that resulted in their willingness to do
anything the ruling class wanted.
But regarding i) above, the time has changed. Global transportation
and communication progress means that the lamas could not keep up with
their decadent live style and be able to get away with it. So, when
the Chinese came in to assert control, the lamas had to yield, no
matter how unwillingly. Regarding ii), China is still working on a
massive resuscitation program to take the people out of their stupid
superstitions and ignorance. But it is a good thing to separate
governing from religion. And so, the requirement for all people in
China to get a mandatory secondary education until 18 years of age
before monkhood means that you are more likely to be making a mature
decision than are doing it because of brainwashing or coercion.
In any case, Tibet has never had a record of independence and the
reason why the lamas were able to reign free with cruelty was only
because of inaccessibility of the geographic area in the old days.
And even today, no country thinks that the monks are capable of
running a country. There is no political basis for an independent
Tibet except the empty talks funded by US Congress's propaganda arm:
the National Endowment for Democracy (NED).
3) China is repressive in Tibet.
If it were true, Tibetans would have risen up in a meaningful way like
the Soviet citizens rose up against the invading Nazi soldiers - not
just red-robed monks kicking down doors of business shops in Lhasa in
2008 in the lead up to China's first hosting of a Summer Olympics or
the highly staged ritual sacrifice of children by fire.
Whatever security measures China's been forced to use in Tibet today,
it is inextricably tied to the uninterrupted stream of foreign-funded
violent activities inside Tibet through the cooperation of some monks
who are working with those Tibetan monks in exile.
So, for as long as foreign subversive activities are at work in Tibet,
the question of how the majority of Tibetans feel about China is hard
to sort out.
China is not intentionally or irrationally repressive in Tibet.
Police presence is simply correlated with the amount of subversion
that goes on. China is in fact fighting a foreign enemy who is intent
on spending a lot of money to pry Tibet loose for its own geopolitical
gain. For as long as the U.S. is massively funding the Tibet issue,
China has in effect no choice but to respond as a security issue for
the entire Chinese population. China just does not want to be made
into an Iraq, an Afghanistan, a Libya, or a Syria. The Chinese people
deserve better if they can defend themselves.
For sure, China still has a Tibet problem. But as long as the U.S. is
spending a few billions each year to destabilize China through Tibet,
and to a lesser extent, Xinjiang, then China has to spend some money
indigenuous or externally caused. And since no western political
system today is willing to tolerate a system where monks make all
political decisions, the West's support for the Dalai Lama and his
TGIE cohorts cannot be viewed in any other way except with suspicions.
But Tibet is not China's Afghanistan or Iraq.
lo yeeOn
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Tibetans don't want repatriation of Dalai Lama: Chinese Vice Minister
Cui
SUBODH GAUTAM
http://www.myrepublica.com/portal/index.php?action=news_details&news_id=54605
BEIJING, May 12: Chinese Vice Minister in the State Council
Information Office Cui Yuying has said that the Tibetan people won't
accept the repatriation of Dalai Lama, who she said is bent on
disintegrating the country.
Cui, who was born in Tibet and later also became chief of Tibet
Autonomous Region (TAR), said people living in TAR do not accept the
political ideology held by Dalai Lama. Foreign media might have been
spreading rumors that Tibetan people want repatriation of Dalai
Lama. But this is not the situation," she said. "Our investigation
has shown that Tibetans do not want to see Dalai Lama coming back."
Cui said that 14th Dalai Lama had not done anything to bring about
development in Tibet. "Dalai Lama only tried to disintegrate the
country. Tibetans do not agree with this kind of thought," she told
visiting journalists from Nepal and India on Thursday evening.
Stating that it was China, which gave him the title of Dalai Lama,
Vice Minister Cui said, "The recognition was not given only for the
14th Dalai Lama, but also for all his predecessors. But Tibetan people
do not agree with the political ideology of the 14th Lama."
Asked if the Chinese government had made any initiatives to repatriate
some 200,000 Tibetan refugees living in India, Cui said, "There is no
problem for Tibetans who would enter Tibet individually. But it is
difficult for those who enter Tibet as a representative of Dalai
Lama," she further said. Dalai Lama, who has been advocating for Free
Tibet, is living an exiled life in Dharmashala, India since 1959.
Cui said there won't be any change in Chinese policy toward the
Tibetans living abroad. "There are many rights and privileges secured
for Tibetans returning to Tibet on individual basis. They will return
to Tibet if they learn about this. Doors are always open for them to
Tibet," she said.
Cui said Dalai Lama might have told that Tibet was like heaven and the
people had everything they needed during his rule. "But that was not
the case. There was abject poverty in Tibet during those days,"
While claiming that US intelligence agency CIA had been distributing
money to Dalai Lama and his followers, Cui said, "Dalai Lama has not
spent that money wisely. This is the reason why his followers are
living a miserable life," she added.
On the occasion, she also mentioned that Chinese government had placed
Tibet in its priority list and it was bringing about development in
different sectors in Tibet. "Tibet was completely different 50 or 60
years ago. The life styles of Tibetan people have changed only
recently," she told.
While there was only one kilometer road from Potala Place to Winter
Palace, only two percent of the population was literate in Tibet when
Dalai Lama had left Tibet. There were no programs for the conservation
of monasteries. The average life expectancy has now reached 70 years
against 36 years back in the 1960s and 99 percent of the Tibetan
people have access to free education. Tibet now has seven airports and
widely connected road network.
Published on 2013-05-13 06:40:23
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
2) Subject: So, let's look at the unethical conduct of the Dalai
Lamas... and that of the U.S. government too! Re: No one is free of
Criticism including China.
In article <7288330.Ssghh1SrV1@Dharma>,
Criticism including China.
In article <7288330.Ssghh1SrV1@Dharma>,
lo yeeOn
May 15, 2013, 6:21:43 PM5/15/13
to
In article <273693075.u9UVT7NB25@Dharma>,
Cut out this "dear friend" crap. It is nauseating because you have no
substance in your response and you clearly did not mean what you said.
As to your "If you internet is not blocked by China's firewall you can
find all (non CCP based) information there" line:
I can say that for any "non CCP based" information on the internet,
you have already dished it out here in these newsgroups, and it is
massively uninformative. And if you disagree, just cite one source
that can explain to anyone here how Tibet ended up falling so fast
from its Genghis Khan glory. Genghis Khan died in the 1200's. There
were no CCP then. So, what happened? Did the CCP set up a firewall
by its previous incarnations to cause the lamas to fall from its
Genghis Khan glory, like a bunch of fallen angels? And if so, what
might those "incarnations" be?
The lamas have fallen. And that's why they are agitating to return.
But once they are fallen, they cannot rise again. You ought to tell
them that.
But it is clear that you were just being evasive because I was citing
what you have posted as evidence that your propaganda has mercilessly
worked against Da Lama and his TGIE cohorts.
So, let's go back to my original response with a current edit.
lo yeeOn
Subject: Explain how Tibet evolved from its Genghis Khan days of glory
So, of course, the Nationalists could afford only a token presence in
they complain. They have lost their past glory and the last vestige
China has none of the problems of either Nazi Germany or the US/NATO
2) Subject: So, let's look at the unethical conduct of the Dalai
substance in your response and you clearly did not mean what you said.
As to your "If you internet is not blocked by China's firewall you can
find all (non CCP based) information there" line:
I can say that for any "non CCP based" information on the internet,
you have already dished it out here in these newsgroups, and it is
massively uninformative. And if you disagree, just cite one source
that can explain to anyone here how Tibet ended up falling so fast
from its Genghis Khan glory. Genghis Khan died in the 1200's. There
were no CCP then. So, what happened? Did the CCP set up a firewall
by its previous incarnations to cause the lamas to fall from its
Genghis Khan glory, like a bunch of fallen angels? And if so, what
might those "incarnations" be?
The lamas have fallen. And that's why they are agitating to return.
But once they are fallen, they cannot rise again. You ought to tell
them that.
But it is clear that you were just being evasive because I was citing
what you have posted as evidence that your propaganda has mercilessly
worked against Da Lama and his TGIE cohorts.
So, let's go back to my original response with a current edit.
lo yeeOn
Subject: Explain how Tibet evolved from its Genghis Khan days of glory
to a time when the CIA's modern weapons and logistics could not help
Da Lama and his troops to resist the PLA for more than a few weeks -
something was rotten in Potala Palace with the lamas! Re: The Dark
Ages in Tibet under the rule of the Lamas are thankfully gone
Da Lama and his troops to resist the PLA for more than a few weeks -
something was rotten in Potala Palace with the lamas! Re: The Dark
Ages in Tibet under the rule of the Lamas are thankfully gone
Tibet despite their assertion of sovereignty over it. But the
decadence of the lamas shows through because they thought they had
nothing to worry about when the world was actually passing them by.
decadence of the lamas shows through because they thought they had
nothing to worry about when the world was actually passing them by.
But everyone should be able to see that the complaints concerning the
way Tibet is governed today mostly come from the monks. Of course,
they complain. They have lost their past glory and the last vestige
of influence of the masses.
But there is no objective reason as to why the corrupt monk system
should not be replaced by an egalitarian one - which the communists
brought in and eventually imposed.
China's current position in Tibet did not arise from a vacuum. It is
particularly not a result of some evil doing on China's part, despite
brought in and eventually imposed.
China's current position in Tibet did not arise from a vacuum. It is
western rhetoric. China was able to go in because the lamas system
had rotted to the core. If Tibet were a reasonable "country" and if
it were a matter of brute force on the Chinese communists' part, they
would have been kicked out like Nazi Germany was kicked out from the
Soviet Union after some 26 million Soviet lives had been lost
resisting or fighting the Nazi invaders.
And if China were using overwhelming force like the U.S. has been
using in Afghanistan and Iraq to gain control of the countries, then
China would still be spending billions, if not tens of billions, per
month hiring military contractors to replace the departing US troops.
it were a matter of brute force on the Chinese communists' part, they
would have been kicked out like Nazi Germany was kicked out from the
Soviet Union after some 26 million Soviet lives had been lost
resisting or fighting the Nazi invaders.
And if China were using overwhelming force like the U.S. has been
using in Afghanistan and Iraq to gain control of the countries, then
China would still be spending billions, if not tens of billions, per
China has none of the problems of either Nazi Germany or the US/NATO
in their foreign adventure. Therefore, it is hard to see that Tibet
is under Chinese occupation. And there are also strong reasons for
that.
First, Tibet had a rotten system that had to be replaced and millions
who needed to be liberated from the lamas and the landowners. And
have had a glimpse into that unspeakably dark past of that region when
the non-producing lamas ran amok in Heinricc Harrer's Seven Years of
Tibet. And many Tibetans today can attest to the social progress made
in the region. In fact, Harrer gave examples of the cruelty he had
personally witnessed, including cases in which he thought were more
inhumane than the death penalty.
As for the perception that substantive progress has actually been made
in Tibet, I will quote Cui Yuying, a contemporary Tibetan Chinese who
tells us that the lamas politics should remain buried in the past.
(See article attached below).
Second, Tibet has never been a foreign land that China had to enter
and waste billions after billions on just trying to subdue. No air
raid in the stealth of night, no missiles, no bullets, no military
is under Chinese occupation. And there are also strong reasons for
that.
First, Tibet had a rotten system that had to be replaced and millions
who needed to be liberated from the lamas and the landowners. And
have had a glimpse into that unspeakably dark past of that region when
the non-producing lamas ran amok in Heinricc Harrer's Seven Years of
Tibet. And many Tibetans today can attest to the social progress made
in the region. In fact, Harrer gave examples of the cruelty he had
personally witnessed, including cases in which he thought were more
inhumane than the death penalty.
As for the perception that substantive progress has actually been made
in Tibet, I will quote Cui Yuying, a contemporary Tibetan Chinese who
tells us that the lamas politics should remain buried in the past.
(See article attached below).
Second, Tibet has never been a foreign land that China had to enter
and waste billions after billions on just trying to subdue. No air
contractors and tens of millions of dollars of bribes to a puppet
government.
government.
For sure, China still has a Tibet problem. But as long as the U.S. is
spending a few billions each year to destabilize China through Tibet,
and to a lesser extent, Xinjiang, then China has to spend some money
spending a few billions each year to destabilize China through Tibet,
and to a lesser extent, Xinjiang, then China has to spend some money
to fight that off. Besides, nobody is able to tell whether it is
indigenuous or externally caused. And since no western political
system today is willing to tolerate a system where monks make all
political decisions, the West's support for the Dalai Lama and his
TGIE cohorts cannot be viewed in any other way except with suspicions.
indigenuous or externally caused. And since no western political
system today is willing to tolerate a system where monks make all
political decisions, the West's support for the Dalai Lama and his
TGIE cohorts cannot be viewed in any other way except with suspicions.
But Tibet is not China's Afghanistan or Iraq.
lo yeeOn
lo yeeOn
lo yeeOn
May 15, 2013, 6:57:51 PM5/15/13
to
In article <5db27a86-72b3-465d...@a10g2000pbr.googlegroups.com>,
Replacement of some broken paragraphs I hastily presented last time:
[China's current position in Tibet did not arise from a vacuum. It
by countries during WWII.)
And if China were using overwhelming force like the U.S. has been
using in Afghanistan and Iraq to gain control of the countries, then
China would still be spending billions, if not tens of billions, per
month hiring military contractors to replace the departing US
>
>There is no evidence that the degree of exploitation prevelant in
>china was the same in Tibet. Remember Tibet outloawed the death
>penalty in 1912.
I am sorry a) I fail to parse the first sentence of your response and
b) I have realized that I had some incomplete sentences in my previous
post that might have confused you too.
So, I have inserted a replacement for the broken paragraphs that I
might have created a confusion for my readers. And I am also
attaching the entire post (with the current edit) right after my
signature so that maybe you Tom Jigme Wheat can clarify what you
wanted to say.
But as far as the death penalty being outlawed in 1912, which even if
I believe it, does not diminish the degree of cruelty in the justice
system set up and run by the lamas between 1912-1949. I have read
plenty of stories in Heinrich Harrer's Seven Years in Tibet which
together painted a grim picture of cruelty under Da Lama's sytem of
justice.
lo yeeOn
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
A corrected edition though no guarantee that it is error free.
Subject: Explain how Tibet evolved from its Genghis Khan days of glory
to a time when the CIA's modern weapons and logistics could not help
Da Lama and his troops to resist the PLA for more than a few weeks -
something was rotten in Potala Palace with the lamas! Re: The Dark
Ages in Tibet under the rule of the Lamas are thankfully gone
So, of course, the Nationalists could afford only a token presence in
they complain. They have lost their past glory and the last vestige
China has none of the problems of either Nazi Germany or the US/NATO
2) Subject: So, let's look at the unethical conduct of the Dalai
>the world’s territory has now been turned into a
>picture and what sort of caption would he give it?’ These
>illegal—clearly shows what kind of status our people
>equally in our nomadic grasslands? Why can’t camera-holding
>‘Taking pictures, peeing and spitting are strictly prohibited
>here!’
>
>http://www.tchrd.org/2013/05/they-treat-us-like-animals/
[China's current position in Tibet did not arise from a vacuum. It
is particularly not a result of some evil doing on China's part,
despite western rhetoric. China was able to go in because the lamas
system had rotted to the core. If Tibet were a reasonable "country"
and if it were a matter of brute force on the Chinese communists'
part, they would have been kicked out like Nazi Germany was kicked
out from the Soviet Union after some 26 million Soviet lives had
been lost resisting or fighting the Nazi invaders.
(The 26 million figure is taken from a wikipedia articles on losses
and if it were a matter of brute force on the Chinese communists'
part, they would have been kicked out like Nazi Germany was kicked
out from the Soviet Union after some 26 million Soviet lives had
been lost resisting or fighting the Nazi invaders.
by countries during WWII.)
And if China were using overwhelming force like the U.S. has been
using in Afghanistan and Iraq to gain control of the countries, then
China would still be spending billions, if not tens of billions, per
troops.
China has none of the problems of either Nazi Germany or the US/NATO
China has none of the problems of either Nazi Germany or the US/NATO
in their foreign adventure. Therefore, it is hard to see that Tibet
is under Chinese occupation. And there are also strong reasons for
that.
First, Tibet had a rotten system that had to be replaced and
millions who needed to be liberated from the lamas and the
landowners. And have had a glimpse into that unspeakably dark past
of that region when the non-producing lamas ran amok in Heinrich
is under Chinese occupation. And there are also strong reasons for
that.
First, Tibet had a rotten system that had to be replaced and
millions who needed to be liberated from the lamas and the
landowners. And have had a glimpse into that unspeakably dark past
Harrer's Seven Years of Tibet. And many Tibetans today can attest
to the social progress made in the region. In fact, Harrer gave
examples of the cruelty he had personally witnessed, including cases
in which he thought were more inhumane than the death penalty.
. . . (long addition - please see attachment below)]
to the social progress made in the region. In fact, Harrer gave
examples of the cruelty he had personally witnessed, including cases
in which he thought were more inhumane than the death penalty.
>
>There is no evidence that the degree of exploitation prevelant in
>china was the same in Tibet. Remember Tibet outloawed the death
>penalty in 1912.
b) I have realized that I had some incomplete sentences in my previous
post that might have confused you too.
So, I have inserted a replacement for the broken paragraphs that I
might have created a confusion for my readers. And I am also
attaching the entire post (with the current edit) right after my
signature so that maybe you Tom Jigme Wheat can clarify what you
wanted to say.
But as far as the death penalty being outlawed in 1912, which even if
I believe it, does not diminish the degree of cruelty in the justice
system set up and run by the lamas between 1912-1949. I have read
plenty of stories in Heinrich Harrer's Seven Years in Tibet which
together painted a grim picture of cruelty under Da Lama's sytem of
justice.
lo yeeOn
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
A corrected edition though no guarantee that it is error free.
Subject: Explain how Tibet evolved from its Genghis Khan days of glory
to a time when the CIA's modern weapons and logistics could not help
Da Lama and his troops to resist the PLA for more than a few weeks -
something was rotten in Potala Palace with the lamas! Re: The Dark
Ages in Tibet under the rule of the Lamas are thankfully gone
Tibet despite their assertion of sovereignty over it. But the
decadence of the lamas shows through because they thought they had
nothing to worry about when the world was actually passing them by.
decadence of the lamas shows through because they thought they had
nothing to worry about when the world was actually passing them by.
But everyone should be able to see that the complaints concerning the
way Tibet is governed today mostly come from the monks. Of course,
they complain. They have lost their past glory and the last vestige
of influence of the masses.
But there is no objective reason as to why the corrupt monk system
should not be replaced by an egalitarian one - which the communists
brought in and eventually imposed.
China's current position in Tibet did not arise from a vacuum. It is
particularly not a result of some evil doing on China's part, despite
brought in and eventually imposed.
China's current position in Tibet did not arise from a vacuum. It is
western rhetoric. China was able to go in because the lamas system
had rotted to the core. If Tibet were a reasonable "country" and if
it were a matter of brute force on the Chinese communists' part, they
would have been kicked out like Nazi Germany was kicked out from the
Soviet Union after some 26 million Soviet lives had been lost
resisting or fighting the Nazi invaders.
And if China were using overwhelming force like the U.S. has been
using in Afghanistan and Iraq to gain control of the countries, then
China would still be spending billions, if not tens of billions, per
month hiring military contractors to replace the departing US troops.
it were a matter of brute force on the Chinese communists' part, they
would have been kicked out like Nazi Germany was kicked out from the
Soviet Union after some 26 million Soviet lives had been lost
resisting or fighting the Nazi invaders.
And if China were using overwhelming force like the U.S. has been
using in Afghanistan and Iraq to gain control of the countries, then
China would still be spending billions, if not tens of billions, per
China has none of the problems of either Nazi Germany or the US/NATO
in their foreign adventure. Therefore, it is hard to see that Tibet
is under Chinese occupation. And there are also strong reasons for
that.
First, Tibet had a rotten system that had to be replaced and millions
who needed to be liberated from the lamas and the landowners. And
have had a glimpse into that unspeakably dark past of that region when
the non-producing lamas ran amok in Heinrich Harrer's Seven Years of
is under Chinese occupation. And there are also strong reasons for
that.
First, Tibet had a rotten system that had to be replaced and millions
who needed to be liberated from the lamas and the landowners. And
have had a glimpse into that unspeakably dark past of that region when
Tibet. And many Tibetans today can attest to the social progress made
in the region. In fact, Harrer gave examples of the cruelty he had
personally witnessed, including cases in which he thought were more
inhumane than the death penalty.
As for the perception that substantive progress has actually been made
in Tibet, I will quote Cui Yuying, a contemporary Tibetan Chinese who
tells us that the lamas politics should remain buried in the past.
(See article attached below).
Second, Tibet has never been a foreign land that China had to enter
and waste billions after billions on just trying to subdue. No air
raid in the stealth of night, no missiles, no bullets, no military
in the region. In fact, Harrer gave examples of the cruelty he had
personally witnessed, including cases in which he thought were more
inhumane than the death penalty.
As for the perception that substantive progress has actually been made
in Tibet, I will quote Cui Yuying, a contemporary Tibetan Chinese who
tells us that the lamas politics should remain buried in the past.
(See article attached below).
Second, Tibet has never been a foreign land that China had to enter
and waste billions after billions on just trying to subdue. No air
contractors and tens of millions of dollars of bribes to a puppet
government.
government.
For sure, China still has a Tibet problem. But as long as the U.S. is
spending a few billions each year to destabilize China through Tibet,
and to a lesser extent, Xinjiang, then China has to spend some money
spending a few billions each year to destabilize China through Tibet,
and to a lesser extent, Xinjiang, then China has to spend some money
to fight that off. Besides, nobody is able to tell whether it is
indigenuous or externally caused. And since no western political
system today is willing to tolerate a system where monks make all
political decisions, the West's support for the Dalai Lama and his
TGIE cohorts cannot be viewed in any other way except with suspicions.
indigenuous or externally caused. And since no western political
system today is willing to tolerate a system where monks make all
political decisions, the West's support for the Dalai Lama and his
TGIE cohorts cannot be viewed in any other way except with suspicions.
But Tibet is not China's Afghanistan or Iraq.
lo yeeOn
lo yeeOn
Lamas... and that of the U.S. government too! Re: No one is free of
Criticism including China.
In article <7288330.Ssghh1SrV1@Dharma>,
Criticism including China.
In article <7288330.Ssghh1SrV1@Dharma>,
>bunch of soul-less slaves serving other people. My dear
>fellow-countrymen, if we cannot paint the bones of our ancestors in
>gold, the least we could do is not to throw their gray hair in the wind.
>
>Tourists visiting from surrounding areas carry cameras of different
>sizes in their hands. Crowds of monks, elderly folks and
>‘servicemen’ bearing horses gape at the tourists when the latter
>fellow-countrymen, if we cannot paint the bones of our ancestors in
>gold, the least we could do is not to throw their gray hair in the wind.
>
>Tourists visiting from surrounding areas carry cameras of different
>sizes in their hands. Crowds of monks, elderly folks and
>take pictures of nomadic villages and rivers. One of the
>tourists pointed his camera at the strange-looking eyes of these
>Tibetans and took their pictures. When I saw this, I wondered:
>‘When the tourist returns to his place, where would he advertize this
>tourists pointed his camera at the strange-looking eyes of these
>Tibetans and took their pictures. When I saw this, I wondered:
>picture and what sort of caption would he give it?’ These
>thoughts gave me intense pain and despair.
>
>Why do these tourists point their cameras on the faces of elderly
>Tibetans and take their pictures? Do these tourists not have a
>sense of ethics and morality? If we turn around and point the camera on
>their faces and take their pictures, wouldn’t they run
>
>Why do these tourists point their cameras on the faces of elderly
>Tibetans and take their pictures? Do these tourists not have a
>sense of ethics and morality? If we turn around and point the camera on
>away from us saying we are violating their rights? The fact that they
>keep taking pictures of our people, our mountains and our
>villages—despite knowing that such actions are unethical, immoral and
>keep taking pictures of our people, our mountains and our
>illegal—clearly shows what kind of status our people
>enjoy. They treat us like animals lacking the ability of speech. They
>treat us as wage laborers who could be swayed in any
>direction by the lure of hard cash. They treat us as a race of ignorant
>barbarians. My dear fellow countrymen, as the saying
>goes, if sons fail to inherit the legacy of forefathers or if the
>thread fails to inherit the legacy of needles, others would keep
>trampling on our heads.
>
>What would happen if you visit a Chinese city and randomly point your
>camera on the face of a Chinese and take his picture?
>What consequences would you have to bear if you selfishly take pictures
>of homes, belongings and other precious objects of a
>city? How would the whip of laws chase you away if you trample upon the
>rights and liberties of people living in a city? Why
>can’t the standards of law and ethics of the cities be applied
>treat us as wage laborers who could be swayed in any
>direction by the lure of hard cash. They treat us as a race of ignorant
>barbarians. My dear fellow countrymen, as the saying
>goes, if sons fail to inherit the legacy of forefathers or if the
>thread fails to inherit the legacy of needles, others would keep
>trampling on our heads.
>
>What would happen if you visit a Chinese city and randomly point your
>camera on the face of a Chinese and take his picture?
>What consequences would you have to bear if you selfishly take pictures
>of homes, belongings and other precious objects of a
>city? How would the whip of laws chase you away if you trample upon the
>rights and liberties of people living in a city? Why
>equally in our nomadic grasslands? Why can’t camera-holding
>tourists riding in cars and masses on horses enjoy equal status if
>human rights have a universal resonance? Like in the cities,
>why can’t we put up signboards in nomadic grasslands declaring,
>human rights have a universal resonance? Like in the cities,
>‘Taking pictures, peeing and spitting are strictly prohibited
>here!’
>
>http://www.tchrd.org/2013/05/they-treat-us-like-animals/
lo yeeOn
May 16, 2013, 1:16:24 AM5/16/13
to
>That is no excuse to take over their country and make them a minority
>as China is doing in Tibet , Xin Jiang and Inner Mongolia
>as China is doing in Tibet , Xin Jiang and Inner Mongolia
But your statement indicates that you are very, very confused.
Given my subject line, your single sentence response begins with the
impression that you were talking about Tibet being taken over when you
talked about "their country". But when you started talking about
making "them a minority", you are comparing them also with A, B, and
C, where A = Tibet, B = Xin Jiang, and C = Inner Mongolia.
So, it appears that you were comparing A with A and B and C.
While it may be logical admissible, it does not make sense to compare
A with A in a linguistic context where words are conveyed to mean
something for communication purposes. It is especially true when A
does not compare well with B or C.
While A can vacuously compare with A itself, it contributes to no
information.
A does not compare well with B because ethnic Tibetans remain the
majority of the TAR while it is possible that ethnic Han Chinese are
getting to be comparable in numbers to the Uighurs.
A also does not compare well with C because there is not a comparable
ethnic struggle in Inner Mongolia.
Furthermore, the critical issue of political importance is that A and
B and C have all been a part of China long before the communists took
Given my subject line, your single sentence response begins with the
impression that you were talking about Tibet being taken over when you
talked about "their country". But when you started talking about
making "them a minority", you are comparing them also with A, B, and
C, where A = Tibet, B = Xin Jiang, and C = Inner Mongolia.
So, it appears that you were comparing A with A and B and C.
While it may be logical admissible, it does not make sense to compare
A with A in a linguistic context where words are conveyed to mean
something for communication purposes. It is especially true when A
does not compare well with B or C.
While A can vacuously compare with A itself, it contributes to no
information.
A does not compare well with B because ethnic Tibetans remain the
majority of the TAR while it is possible that ethnic Han Chinese are
getting to be comparable in numbers to the Uighurs.
A also does not compare well with C because there is not a comparable
ethnic struggle in Inner Mongolia.
Furthermore, the critical issue of political importance is that A and
over. Just compare the map of China in the Qing dynasty (for nearly
three hundred years of history) with the current one and compare the
map of the Republic of China (1911-1949) with the current Chinese map,
and you will see that the current map contains no more territory than
its two predecessors. In fact, the ROC claimed Outer Mongolia as its
own, which is a large piece of land, just as its predecessor did but
three hundred years of history) with the current one and compare the
map of the Republic of China (1911-1949) with the current Chinese map,
and you will see that the current map contains no more territory than
its two predecessors. In fact, the ROC claimed Outer Mongolia as its
China does not. But all of them claim A, B, and C as part of its
territory.
So, there is no basis to talk about China "taking over" A, or B, or C,
regardless of the ethnic composition in those areas.
As to ethnic composition in any region in the world, it changes all
the time. As long as sovereignty is not a question, there is no basis
for a complaint about ethnic composition, unless you do not believe in
the freedom of movement within a country.
In the US, ethnic composition has changed rapidly in recent years.
territory.
So, there is no basis to talk about China "taking over" A, or B, or C,
regardless of the ethnic composition in those areas.
As to ethnic composition in any region in the world, it changes all
the time. As long as sovereignty is not a question, there is no basis
for a complaint about ethnic composition, unless you do not believe in
the freedom of movement within a country.
Only petty sour grapes types complain about the hispanic population
becoming the majority in such and such a state.
Of course, the US killed all the American Indians to become what it is
today. China has not pursued such a policy. There is no evidence
that China's policy in Tibet is meant to harm ethnic Tibetans. It is
pure VOA, RFA type propaganda in collaboration with Da Lama and his
TGIE cohorts.
Now consider the fact that some Tibetans count the Mongols as their
forebears and thus lamented the loss of its past glory. So, a legit
My guess is you can't blame the CCP for robbing it from the Mongols or
for more than some four score and x number of years, the Tibetan
lamas stayed alive only by agreeing to be somebody else's vassal or
tributory state.
Of course, the Chinese suffered their own humiliation before the whole
world when Imperial Japan and colonialists from the West entered China
Of course, the Chinese suffered their own humiliation before the whole
at will and carved up its prime real estate along the coasts. And
when a group of Chinese believed that with righteousness, they could
fight off the invaders with their own bare fists, they got shot dead
right away or if they got captured, their heads got chopped off with
the shiny swords the imperial Japanese soldiers wielded in full public
view. One can relive such grusome moments by viewing photos from
history books.
At least the intellectuals among the Chinese people at the time knew
what was wrong. They looked inside themselves. And they fought their
way out.
But let's focus on these three groups that existed in China: the
Tibetans under the lamas, the Nationalist soldiers, and the communists
At least the intellectuals among the Chinese people at the time knew
what was wrong. They looked inside themselves. And they fought their
way out.
But let's focus on these three groups that existed in China: the
along with their peasant allies. We know that the lives of the lamas
were extremely decadent while the masses were illiterate and
relentlessly exploited. (In Heinrich Harrer's Seven Years in Tibet,
he recounted the first dinner he was invited to have dinner with the
"Holy Mother", i.e., the mother of Da Lama and the record-holder of
being the mother of the largest number of Incarnations, he counted 40
dishes at the banquet of many guests. And this was happening among
the Tibetans in the "noble class" while the masses had to work from
morning to dark, panting and moaning at the hard work they had to do
to survive. Tibet under the Lamas was clearly heading to trouble
because the system was so inequitable.) And we also know that the
Nationalist under Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek was getting U.S.
military and economic aide to fight the communists. But who was
relentlessly exploited. (In Heinrich Harrer's Seven Years in Tibet,
he recounted the first dinner he was invited to have dinner with the
"Holy Mother", i.e., the mother of Da Lama and the record-holder of
being the mother of the largest number of Incarnations, he counted 40
dishes at the banquet of many guests. And this was happening among
the Tibetans in the "noble class" while the masses had to work from
morning to dark, panting and moaning at the hard work they had to do
to survive. Tibet under the Lamas was clearly heading to trouble
because the system was so inequitable.) And we also know that the
Nationalist under Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek was getting U.S.
supplying the communist guerrilla soldiers? Hardly anyone, except
maybe the Soviet Union. They might have given them so rifles,
grenades, and ammunition. Mostly, on a one-on-one basis, they were
poorly equipped and could not have fought off the Nationalists, not to
defeat them.
The fact that the communists successfully took over China, with little
poorly equipped and could not have fought off the Nationalists, not to
defeat them.
First, Tibet had a rotten system that had to be replaced and millions
who needed to be liberated from the lamas and the landowners. And we
have had a glimpse into that unspeakably dark past of that region when
the non-producing lamas ran amok in Heinricc Harrer's Seven Years of
Tibet. And many Tibetans today can attest to the social progress made
in the region. In fact, Harrer gave examples of the cruelty he had
personally witnessed, including cases in which he thought were more
inhumane than the death penalty.
As for the perception that substantive progress has actually been made
in Tibet, I will quote Cui Yuying, a contemporary Tibetan Chinese who
tells us that the lamas politics should remain buried in the past.
(See article attached below.)
in the region. In fact, Harrer gave examples of the cruelty he had
personally witnessed, including cases in which he thought were more
inhumane than the death penalty.
As for the perception that substantive progress has actually been made
in Tibet, I will quote Cui Yuying, a contemporary Tibetan Chinese who
tells us that the lamas politics should remain buried in the past.
hundreds of years a part of China.
And if the Tibetans were unhappy with the Chinese rule, they should
have done something about it. But they never did. The lamas and
landowners enjoyed massively decadent lives with most the province's
wealth at their disposal while the masses lived in abject poverty and
And if the Tibetans were unhappy with the Chinese rule, they should
have done something about it. But they never did. The lamas and
landowners enjoyed massively decadent lives with most the province's
despair. The ruling class was outwardly hostile to technology and
progress, according to Harrer.
It was able to maintain this hostility for two reasons: i) it was a
progress, according to Harrer.
different time when Tibet was hard to reach so that the ruling class
could exploit the masses with impunity; and ii) the lamas had
successfully beaten a massively false belief system into the brains of
the masses that resulted in their willingness to do anything the
ruling class wanted.
But regarding i) above, the times have changed. Global transportation
the masses that resulted in their willingness to do anything the
ruling class wanted.
and communication progress means that the lamas could not keep up with
their decadent live style and be able to get away with it. So, when
the Chinese came in to assert control, the lamas had to yield, no
matter how unwillingly. Regarding ii), China is still working on a
massive resuscitation program to take the people out of their stupid
superstitions and ignorance. But it is a good thing to separate
governing from religion. And so, the requirement for all people in
China to get a mandatory secondary education until 18 years of age
before monkhood means that you are more likely to be making a mature
decision than are doing it because of brainwashing or coercion.
In any case, Tibet has never had a record of independence and the
reason why the lamas were able to reign free with cruelty was only
because of inaccessibility of the geographic area in the old days.
And even today, no country thinks that the monks are capable of
running a country. There is no political basis for an independent
Tibet except the empty talk funded by US Congress's propaganda arm:
their decadent live style and be able to get away with it. So, when
the Chinese came in to assert control, the lamas had to yield, no
matter how unwillingly. Regarding ii), China is still working on a
massive resuscitation program to take the people out of their stupid
superstitions and ignorance. But it is a good thing to separate
governing from religion. And so, the requirement for all people in
China to get a mandatory secondary education until 18 years of age
before monkhood means that you are more likely to be making a mature
decision than are doing it because of brainwashing or coercion.
In any case, Tibet has never had a record of independence and the
reason why the lamas were able to reign free with cruelty was only
because of inaccessibility of the geographic area in the old days.
And even today, no country thinks that the monks are capable of
running a country. There is no political basis for an independent
>Tourists visiting from surrounding areas carry cameras of different
>sizes in their hands. Crowds of monks, elderly folks and
>‘servicemen’ bearing horses gape at the tourists when the latter
>sizes in their hands. Crowds of monks, elderly folks and
>take pictures of nomadic villages and rivers. One of the
>tourists pointed his camera at the strange-looking eyes of these
>Tibetans and took their pictures. When I saw this, I wondered:
>‘When the tourist returns to his place, where would he advertize this
>tourists pointed his camera at the strange-looking eyes of these
>Tibetans and took their pictures. When I saw this, I wondered:
>picture and what sort of caption would he give it?’ These
>thoughts gave me intense pain and despair.
>
>Why do these tourists point their cameras on the faces of elderly
>Tibetans and take their pictures? Do these tourists not have a
>sense of ethics and morality? If we turn around and point the camera on
>their faces and take their pictures, wouldn’t they run
>
>Why do these tourists point their cameras on the faces of elderly
>Tibetans and take their pictures? Do these tourists not have a
>sense of ethics and morality? If we turn around and point the camera on
>away from us saying we are violating their rights? The fact that they
>keep taking pictures of our people, our mountains and our
>villages—despite knowing that such actions are unethical, immoral and
>keep taking pictures of our people, our mountains and our
>illegal—clearly shows what kind of status our people
>enjoy. They treat us like animals lacking the ability of speech. They
>treat us as wage laborers who could be swayed in any
>direction by the lure of hard cash. They treat us as a race of ignorant
>barbarians. My dear fellow countrymen, as the saying
>goes, if sons fail to inherit the legacy of forefathers or if the
>thread fails to inherit the legacy of needles, others would keep
>trampling on our heads.
>
>What would happen if you visit a Chinese city and randomly point your
>camera on the face of a Chinese and take his picture?
>What consequences would you have to bear if you selfishly take pictures
>of homes, belongings and other precious objects of a
>city? How would the whip of laws chase you away if you trample upon the
>rights and liberties of people living in a city? Why
>can’t the standards of law and ethics of the cities be applied
>treat us as wage laborers who could be swayed in any
>direction by the lure of hard cash. They treat us as a race of ignorant
>barbarians. My dear fellow countrymen, as the saying
>goes, if sons fail to inherit the legacy of forefathers or if the
>thread fails to inherit the legacy of needles, others would keep
>trampling on our heads.
>
>What would happen if you visit a Chinese city and randomly point your
>camera on the face of a Chinese and take his picture?
>What consequences would you have to bear if you selfishly take pictures
>of homes, belongings and other precious objects of a
>city? How would the whip of laws chase you away if you trample upon the
>rights and liberties of people living in a city? Why
>equally in our nomadic grasslands? Why can’t camera-holding
>tourists riding in cars and masses on horses enjoy equal status if
>human rights have a universal resonance? Like in the cities,
>why can’t we put up signboards in nomadic grasslands declaring,
>human rights have a universal resonance? Like in the cities,
>‘Taking pictures, peeing and spitting are strictly prohibited
>here!’
>
>http://www.tchrd.org/2013/05/they-treat-us-like-animals/
lo yeeOn
May 16, 2013, 9:45:41 PM5/16/13
to
In article <5db27a86-72b3-465d...@a10g2000pbr.googlegroups.com>,
The Progressive Voice <thomasw...@gmail.com> wrote:
The Progressive Voice <thomasw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> dynasty (for nearly three hundred years of history) with the
>> current one and compare the map of the Republic of China
>> (1911-1949) with the current Chinese map, and you will see that the
>> current map contains no more territory than its two predecessors.
>> In fact, the ROC claimed Outer Mongolia as its own, which is a
>> large piece of land, just as its predecessor did but China does
>> current one and compare the map of the Republic of China
>> (1911-1949) with the current Chinese map, and you will see that the
>> current map contains no more territory than its two predecessors.
>> In fact, the ROC claimed Outer Mongolia as its own, which is a
>> not. But all of them claim A, B, and C as part of its territory.
>>
>> So, there is no basis to talk about China "taking over" A, or B, or
>> C, regardless of the ethnic composition in those areas.
>>
>> As to ethnic composition in any region in the world, it changes all
>> the time. As long as sovereignty is not a question, there is no
>> basis for a complaint about ethnic composition, unless you do not
>> believe in the freedom of movement within a country.
>>
>>
>> So, there is no basis to talk about China "taking over" A, or B, or
>> C, regardless of the ethnic composition in those areas.
>>
>> As to ethnic composition in any region in the world, it changes all
>> the time. As long as sovereignty is not a question, there is no
>> basis for a complaint about ethnic composition, unless you do not
>> believe in the freedom of movement within a country.
>>
>> In the US, ethnic composition has changed rapidly in recent years.
>> Only petty sour grapes types complain about the hispanic population
>> becoming the majority in such and such a state.
>> Only petty sour grapes types complain about the hispanic population
>>
>> Of course, the US killed all the American Indians to become what it
>> is today. China has not pursued such a policy. There is no
>> evidence that China's policy in Tibet is meant to harm ethnic
>> Tibetans. It is pure VOA, RFA type propaganda in collaboration
>> with Da Lama and his TGIE cohorts.
>>
>> Now consider the fact that some Tibetans count the Mongols as their
>> forebears and thus lamented the loss of its past glory. So, a
>> legit question is to ask how did they manage to lose that glory?
>> Of course, the US killed all the American Indians to become what it
>> is today. China has not pursued such a policy. There is no
>> evidence that China's policy in Tibet is meant to harm ethnic
>> Tibetans. It is pure VOA, RFA type propaganda in collaboration
>> with Da Lama and his TGIE cohorts.
>>
>> Now consider the fact that some Tibetans count the Mongols as their
>> forebears and thus lamented the loss of its past glory. So, a
>>
>> My guess is you can't blame the CCP for robbing it from the Mongols
>> or the Tibetan lamas. While Mongols couldn't hold their far-flung
>> My guess is you can't blame the CCP for robbing it from the Mongols
>> empire for more than some four score and x number of years, the
>> Tibetan lamas stayed alive only by agreeing to be somebody else's
>> vassal or tributory state.
>>
>> Of course, the Chinese suffered their own humiliation before the
>> whole world when Imperial Japan and colonialists from the West
>> Of course, the Chinese suffered their own humiliation before the
>> entered China at will and carved up its prime real estate along the
>> coasts. And when a group of Chinese believed that with
>> righteousness, they could fight off the invaders with their own
>> bare fists, they got shot dead right away or if they got captured,
>> their heads got chopped off with the shiny swords the imperial
>> Japanese soldiers wielded in full public view. One can relive such
>> grusome moments by viewing photos from history books.
>> righteousness, they could fight off the invaders with their own
>> bare fists, they got shot dead right away or if they got captured,
>> their heads got chopped off with the shiny swords the imperial
>> Japanese soldiers wielded in full public view. One can relive such
>>
>> At least the intellectuals among the Chinese people at the time
>> knew what was wrong. They looked inside themselves. And they
>> fought their way out.
>>
>> But let's focus on these three groups that existed in China: the
>> At least the intellectuals among the Chinese people at the time
>> knew what was wrong. They looked inside themselves. And they
>> fought their way out.
>>
>> But let's focus on these three groups that existed in China: the
>> Tibetans under the lamas, the Nationalist soldiers, and the
>> communists along with their peasant allies. We know that the lives
>> of the lamas were extremely decadent while the masses were
>> illiterate and relentlessly exploited. (In Heinrich Harrer's Seven
>> Years in Tibet, he recounted the first dinner he was invited to
>> have dinner with the "Holy Mother", i.e., the mother of Da Lama and
>> the record-holder of being the mother of the largest number of
>> Incarnations, he counted 40 dishes at the banquet of many guests.
>> And this was happening among the Tibetans in the "noble class"
>> while the masses had to work from morning to dark, panting and
>> moaning at the hard work they had to do to survive. Tibet under
>> the Lamas was clearly heading to trouble because the system was so
>> inequitable.) And we also know that the Nationalist under
>> Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek was getting U.S. military and
>> economic aide to fight the communists. But who was supplying the
>> illiterate and relentlessly exploited. (In Heinrich Harrer's Seven
>> Years in Tibet, he recounted the first dinner he was invited to
>> have dinner with the "Holy Mother", i.e., the mother of Da Lama and
>> the record-holder of being the mother of the largest number of
>> Incarnations, he counted 40 dishes at the banquet of many guests.
>> And this was happening among the Tibetans in the "noble class"
>> while the masses had to work from morning to dark, panting and
>> moaning at the hard work they had to do to survive. Tibet under
>> the Lamas was clearly heading to trouble because the system was so
>> inequitable.) And we also know that the Nationalist under
>> Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek was getting U.S. military and
>> communist guerrilla soldiers? Hardly anyone, except maybe the
>> Soviet Union. They might have given them so rifles, grenades, and
>> ammunition. Mostly, on a one-on-one basis, they were poorly
>> equipped and could not have fought off the Nationalists, not to
>> defeat them.
>>
>> The fact that the communists successfully took over China, with
>> ammunition. Mostly, on a one-on-one basis, they were poorly
>> equipped and could not have fought off the Nationalists, not to
>> defeat them.
>>
>> little fighting, shows that they won by the force of logic - not by
>> force of luck.
>>
>> So, of course, the Nationalists could afford only token presence in
>> Tibet despite their assertion of sovereignty over it. � But the
>> decadence of the lamas shows through because they thought they had
>> nothing to worry about when the world was actually passing them by.
>>
>> force of luck.
>>
>> So, of course, the Nationalists could afford only token presence in
>> Tibet despite their assertion of sovereignty over it. � But the
>> decadence of the lamas shows through because they thought they had
>> nothing to worry about when the world was actually passing them by.
>>
Replacement of some broken paragraphs I hastily presented last time:
[China's current position in Tibet did not arise from a vacuum. It
is particularly not a result of some evil doing on China's part,
despite western rhetoric. China was able to go in because the lamas
system had rotted to the core. If Tibet were a reasonable "country"
and if it were a matter of brute force on the Chinese communists'
part, they would have been kicked out like Nazi Germany was kicked
and if it were a matter of brute force on the Chinese communists'
out from the Soviet Union, even after some 26 million Soviet lives
had been lost resisting or fighting the Nazi invaders.
(The 26 million figure is taken from a wikipedia article on losses
by countries during WWII.)
And if China were using overwhelming force like the U.S. has been
using in Afghanistan and Iraq to gain control of the countries, then
China would still be spending billions, if not tens of billions, per
just as the US has.
And had China been compelled to fight an insurgency war anywhere in
the world since 1950, she would have been surely and totally broke!
China has clearly neither the Nazi Germany or the US/NATO problems.
Thus, it is hard to see that Tibet is ever under Chinese occupation.
And there are of course strong reasons for the difference.
First, Tibet had a rotten system that had to be replaced and
millions who needed to be liberated from the lamas and the
of that region when the non-producing lamas ran amok in Heinrich
Harrer's Seven Years of Tibet. And many Tibetans today can attest
to the social progress made in the region. In fact, Harrer gave
examples of the cruelty he had personally witnessed, including cases
in which he thought were more inhumane than the death penalty.
to the social progress made in the region. In fact, Harrer gave
examples of the cruelty he had personally witnessed, including cases
in which he thought were more inhumane than the death penalty.
. . . (long addition - please see attachment below)]
>
>
>There is no evidence that the degree of exploitation prevelant in
>china was the same in Tibet. Remember Tibet outloawed the death
>penalty in 1912.
>china was the same in Tibet. Remember Tibet outloawed the death
>penalty in 1912.
I am sorry a) I fail to parse the first sentence of your response and
b) I have realized that I had some incomplete sentences in my previous
post that might have confused you too.
So, I have inserted a replacement for the broken paragraphs that might
b) I have realized that I had some incomplete sentences in my previous
post that might have confused you too.
have caused confusion for my readers. And I am also attaching the
entire post (with the current edit) right after my signature so that
maybe you Tom Jigme Wheat can clarify what you wanted to say.
But as far as the death penalty being outlawed in 1912, which even if
I believe it, does not diminish the degree of cruelty in the justice
system set up and run by the lamas between 1912-1949. I have read
plenty of stories in Heinrich Harrer's Seven Years in Tibet which
together painted a grim picture of cruelty under Da Lama's sytem of
justice.
lo yeeOn
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
A corrected edition though no guarantee that it is error free.
Subject: Explain how Tibet evolved from its Genghis Khan days of glory
to a time when the CIA's modern weapons and logistics could not help
Da Lama and his troops to resist the PLA for more than a few weeks -
something was rotten in Potala Palace with the lamas! Re: The Dark
Ages in Tibet under the rule of the Lamas are thankfully gone
maybe you Tom Jigme Wheat can clarify what you wanted to say.
But as far as the death penalty being outlawed in 1912, which even if
I believe it, does not diminish the degree of cruelty in the justice
system set up and run by the lamas between 1912-1949. I have read
plenty of stories in Heinrich Harrer's Seven Years in Tibet which
together painted a grim picture of cruelty under Da Lama's sytem of
justice.
lo yeeOn
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
A corrected edition though no guarantee that it is error free.
Subject: Explain how Tibet evolved from its Genghis Khan days of glory
to a time when the CIA's modern weapons and logistics could not help
Da Lama and his troops to resist the PLA for more than a few weeks -
something was rotten in Potala Palace with the lamas! Re: The Dark
Ages in Tibet under the rule of the Lamas are thankfully gone
In article <518c31f3....@news.giganews.com>, <hab...@anony.net> wrote:
>That is no excuse to take over their country and make them a minority
>as China is doing in Tibet , Xin Jiang and Inner Mongolia
But your statement indicates that you are very, very confused.
Given my subject line, your single sentence response begins with the
impression that you were talking about Tibet being taken over when you
talked about "their country". But when you started talking about
making "them a minority", you are comparing them also with A, B, and
C, where A = Tibet, B = Xin Jiang, and C = Inner Mongolia.
So, it appears that you were comparing A with A and B and C.
While it may be logical admissible, it does not make sense to compare
A with A in a linguistic context where words are conveyed to mean
something for communication purposes. It is especially true when A
does not compare well with B or C.
While A can vacuously compare with A itself, it contributes to no
information.
A does not compare well with B because ethnic Tibetans remain the
majority of the TAR while it is possible that ethnic Han Chinese are
getting to be comparable in numbers to the Uighurs.
A also does not compare well with C because there is not a comparable
ethnic struggle in Inner Mongolia.
Furthermore, the critical issue of political importance is that A and
B and C have all been a part of China long before the communists took
>That is no excuse to take over their country and make them a minority
>as China is doing in Tibet , Xin Jiang and Inner Mongolia
But your statement indicates that you are very, very confused.
Given my subject line, your single sentence response begins with the
impression that you were talking about Tibet being taken over when you
talked about "their country". But when you started talking about
making "them a minority", you are comparing them also with A, B, and
C, where A = Tibet, B = Xin Jiang, and C = Inner Mongolia.
So, it appears that you were comparing A with A and B and C.
While it may be logical admissible, it does not make sense to compare
A with A in a linguistic context where words are conveyed to mean
something for communication purposes. It is especially true when A
does not compare well with B or C.
While A can vacuously compare with A itself, it contributes to no
information.
A does not compare well with B because ethnic Tibetans remain the
majority of the TAR while it is possible that ethnic Han Chinese are
getting to be comparable in numbers to the Uighurs.
A also does not compare well with C because there is not a comparable
ethnic struggle in Inner Mongolia.
Furthermore, the critical issue of political importance is that A and
over. Just compare the map of China in the Qing dynasty (for nearly
three hundred years of history) with the current one and compare the
map of the Republic of China (1911-1949) with the current Chinese map,
and you will see that the current map contains no more territory than
its two predecessors. In fact, the ROC claimed Outer Mongolia as its
own, which is a large piece of land, just as its predecessor did but
three hundred years of history) with the current one and compare the
map of the Republic of China (1911-1949) with the current Chinese map,
and you will see that the current map contains no more territory than
its two predecessors. In fact, the ROC claimed Outer Mongolia as its
China does not. But all of them claim A, B, and C as part of its
territory.
So, there is no basis to talk about China "taking over" A, or B, or C,
regardless of the ethnic composition in those areas.
As to ethnic composition in any region in the world, it changes all
the time. As long as sovereignty is not a question, there is no basis
for a complaint about ethnic composition, unless you do not believe in
the freedom of movement within a country.
territory.
So, there is no basis to talk about China "taking over" A, or B, or C,
regardless of the ethnic composition in those areas.
As to ethnic composition in any region in the world, it changes all
the time. As long as sovereignty is not a question, there is no basis
for a complaint about ethnic composition, unless you do not believe in
the freedom of movement within a country.
In the US, ethnic composition has changed rapidly in recent years.
Only petty sour grapes types complain about the hispanic population
becoming the majority in such and such a state.
Only petty sour grapes types complain about the hispanic population
Of course, the US killed all the American Indians to become what it is
today. China has not pursued such a policy. There is no evidence
that China's policy in Tibet is meant to harm ethnic Tibetans. It is
pure VOA, RFA type propaganda in collaboration with Da Lama and his
TGIE cohorts.
Now consider the fact that some Tibetans count the Mongols as their
forebears and thus lamented the loss of its past glory. So, a legit
My guess is you can't blame the CCP for robbing it from the Mongols or
for more than some four score and x number of years, the Tibetan
lamas stayed alive only by agreeing to be somebody else's vassal or
tributory state.
Of course, the Chinese suffered their own humiliation before the whole
world when Imperial Japan and colonialists from the West entered China
Of course, the Chinese suffered their own humiliation before the whole
at will and carved up its prime real estate along the coasts. And
when a group of Chinese believed that with righteousness, they could
fight off the invaders with their own bare fists, they got shot dead
right away or if they got captured, their heads got chopped off with
the shiny swords the imperial Japanese soldiers wielded in full public
view. One can relive such grusome moments by viewing photos from
fight off the invaders with their own bare fists, they got shot dead
right away or if they got captured, their heads got chopped off with
the shiny swords the imperial Japanese soldiers wielded in full public
view. One can relive such grusome moments by viewing photos from
history books.
At least the intellectuals among the Chinese people at the time knew
what was wrong. They looked inside themselves. And they fought their
way out.
But let's focus on these three groups that existed in China: the
At least the intellectuals among the Chinese people at the time knew
what was wrong. They looked inside themselves. And they fought their
way out.
But let's focus on these three groups that existed in China: the
Tibetans under the lamas, the Nationalist soldiers, and the communists
along with their peasant allies. We know that the lives of the lamas
were extremely decadent while the masses were illiterate and
relentlessly exploited. (In Heinrich Harrer's Seven Years in Tibet,
he recounted the first dinner he was invited to have dinner with the
"Holy Mother", i.e., the mother of Da Lama and the record-holder of
being the mother of the largest number of Incarnations, he counted 40
dishes at the banquet of many guests. And this was happening among
the Tibetans in the "noble class" while the masses had to work from
morning to dark, panting and moaning at the hard work they had to do
to survive. Tibet under the Lamas was clearly heading to trouble
because the system was so inequitable.) And we also know that the
Nationalist under Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek was getting U.S.
military and economic aide to fight the communists. But who was
relentlessly exploited. (In Heinrich Harrer's Seven Years in Tibet,
he recounted the first dinner he was invited to have dinner with the
"Holy Mother", i.e., the mother of Da Lama and the record-holder of
being the mother of the largest number of Incarnations, he counted 40
dishes at the banquet of many guests. And this was happening among
the Tibetans in the "noble class" while the masses had to work from
morning to dark, panting and moaning at the hard work they had to do
to survive. Tibet under the Lamas was clearly heading to trouble
because the system was so inequitable.) And we also know that the
Nationalist under Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek was getting U.S.
supplying the communist guerrilla soldiers? Hardly anyone, except
maybe the Soviet Union. They might have given them so rifles,
grenades, and ammunition. Mostly, on a one-on-one basis, they were
poorly equipped and could not have fought off the Nationalists, not to
defeat them.
The fact that the communists successfully took over China, with little
poorly equipped and could not have fought off the Nationalists, not to
defeat them.
fighting, shows that they won by the force of logic - not by force of
luck.
So, of course, the Nationalists could afford only a token presence in
luck.
Tibet despite their assertion of sovereignty over it. But the
decadence of the lamas shows through because they thought they had
nothing to worry about when the world was actually passing them by.
decadence of the lamas shows through because they thought they had
nothing to worry about when the world was actually passing them by.
But everyone should be able to see that the complaints concerning the
way Tibet is governed today mostly come from the monks. Of course,
they complain. They have lost their past glory and the last vestige
of influence of the masses.
But there is no objective reason as to why the corrupt monk system
should not be replaced by an egalitarian one - which the communists
brought in and eventually imposed.
China's current position in Tibet did not arise from a vacuum.
brought in and eventually imposed.
China's current position in Tibet did not arise from a vacuum.
It is particularly not a result of some evil doing on China's part,
despite western rhetoric.
China was able to go in because the lamas system had rotted to the
core.
If Tibet were a reasonable "country" and if it were a matter of brute
like Nazi Germany was kicked out from the Soviet Union, even after
some 26 million Soviet lives had been lost resisting or fighting the
Nazi invaders.
(The 26 million figure is taken from a wikipedia article on losses by
Nazi invaders.
countries during WWII.)
And if China were using overwhelming force like the U.S. has been
using in Afghanistan and Iraq to gain control of the countries, then
China would still be spending billions, if not tens of billions, per
just as the US has.
And had China been compelled to fight an insurgency war anywhere in
the world since 1950, she would have been surely and totally broke!
China has clearly neither the Nazi Germany or the US/NATO problems.
Thus, it is hard to see that Tibet is ever under Chinese occupation.
And there are of course strong reasons for the difference.
First, Tibet had a rotten system that had to be replaced and millions
who needed to be liberated from the lamas and the landowners. And we
have had a glimpse into that unspeakably dark past of that region when
the non-producing lamas ran amok in Heinricc Harrer's Seven Years of
Tibet. And many Tibetans today can attest to the social progress made
in the region. In fact, Harrer gave examples of the cruelty he had
personally witnessed, including cases in which he thought were more
inhumane than the death penalty.
As for the perception that substantive progress has actually been made
in Tibet, I will quote Cui Yuying, a contemporary Tibetan Chinese who
tells us that the lamas politics should remain buried in the past.
(See article attached below.)
Second, Tibet has never been a foreign land that China had to enter
and waste billions after billions on just trying to subdue. No air
contractors and tens of millions of dollars of bribes to a puppet
government.
government.
For sure, China still has a Tibet problem. But as long as the U.S. is
spending a few billions each year to destabilize China through Tibet,
and to a lesser extent, Xinjiang, then China has to spend some money
spending a few billions each year to destabilize China through Tibet,
and to a lesser extent, Xinjiang, then China has to spend some money
to fight that off. Besides, nobody is able to tell whether it is
indigenuous or externally caused. And since no western political
system today is willing to tolerate a system where monks make all
political decisions, the West's support for the Dalai Lama and his
TGIE cohorts cannot be viewed in any other way except with suspicion.
indigenuous or externally caused. And since no western political
system today is willing to tolerate a system where monks make all
political decisions, the West's support for the Dalai Lama and his
TGIE cohorts cannot be viewed in any other way except with suspicion.
But Tibet is not China's Afghanistan or Iraq.
lo yeeOn
lo yeeOn
Lamas... and that of the U.S. government too! Re: No one is free of
Criticism including China.
In article <7288330.Ssghh1SrV1@Dharma>,
Criticism including China.
In article <7288330.Ssghh1SrV1@Dharma>,
lo yeeOn
May 16, 2013, 9:50:40 PM5/16/13
to
In article <273693075.u9UVT7NB25@Dharma>,
Of course, the US killed all the American Indians to become what it is
today. China has not pursued such a policy. There is no evidence
that China's policy in Tibet is meant to harm ethnic Tibetans. It is
pure VOA, RFA type propaganda in collaboration with Da Lama and his
TGIE cohorts.
Now consider the fact that some Tibetans count the Mongols as their
forebears and thus lamented the loss of its past glory. So, a legit
question is to ask how did they manage to lose that glory?
My guess is you can't blame the CCP for robbing it from the Mongols or
the Tibetan lamas. While Mongols couldn't hold their far-flung empire
for more than some four score and x number of years, the Tibetan
lamas stayed alive only by agreeing to be somebody else's vassal or
supplying the communist guerrilla soldiers? Hardly anyone, except
maybe the Soviet Union. They might have given them so rifles,
they complain. They have lost their past glory and the last vestige
China was able to go in because the lamas system had rotted to the
core.
If Tibet were a reasonable "country" and if it were a matter of brute
force on the Chinese communists' part, they would have been kicked out
like Nazi Germany was kicked out from the Soviet Union after some 26
2) Subject: So, let's look at the unethical conduct of the Dalai
Cut out this "dear friend" crap. It is nauseating because you have no
substance in your response and you clearly did not mean what you said.
As to your "If you internet is not blocked by China's firewall you can
find all (non CCP based) information there" line:
I can say that for any "non CCP based" information on the internet,
you have already dished it out here in these newsgroups, and it is
massively uninformative. And if you disagree, just cite one source
that can explain to anyone here how Tibet ended up falling so fast
from its Genghis Khan glory. Genghis Khan died in the 1200's. There
was no CCP then. So, what happened? Did the CCP set up a firewall
substance in your response and you clearly did not mean what you said.
As to your "If you internet is not blocked by China's firewall you can
find all (non CCP based) information there" line:
I can say that for any "non CCP based" information on the internet,
you have already dished it out here in these newsgroups, and it is
massively uninformative. And if you disagree, just cite one source
that can explain to anyone here how Tibet ended up falling so fast
from its Genghis Khan glory. Genghis Khan died in the 1200's. There
by its previous incarnations to cause the lamas to fall from its
Genghis Khan glory, like a bunch of fallen angels? And if so, what
might those "incarnations" be?
The lamas have fallen. And that's why they are agitating to return.
But once they are fallen, they cannot rise again. You ought to tell
them that.
But it is clear that you were just being evasive because I was citing
what you have posted as evidence that your propaganda has mercilessly
worked against Da Lama and his TGIE cohorts.
So, let's go back to my original response with a current edit.
lo yeeOn
Subject: Explain how Tibet evolved from its Genghis Khan days of glory
Genghis Khan glory, like a bunch of fallen angels? And if so, what
might those "incarnations" be?
The lamas have fallen. And that's why they are agitating to return.
But once they are fallen, they cannot rise again. You ought to tell
them that.
But it is clear that you were just being evasive because I was citing
what you have posted as evidence that your propaganda has mercilessly
worked against Da Lama and his TGIE cohorts.
So, let's go back to my original response with a current edit.
lo yeeOn
to a time when the CIA's modern weapons and logistics could not help
Da Lama and his troops to resist the PLA for more than a few weeks -
something was rotten in Potala Palace with the lamas! Re: The Dark
Ages in Tibet under the rule of the Lamas are thankfully gone
Da Lama and his troops to resist the PLA for more than a few weeks -
something was rotten in Potala Palace with the lamas! Re: The Dark
Ages in Tibet under the rule of the Lamas are thankfully gone
In article <518c31f3....@news.giganews.com>, <hab...@anony.net> wrote:
>That is no excuse to take over their country and make them a minority
>as China is doing in Tibet , Xin Jiang and Inner Mongolia
But your statement indicates that you are very, very confused.
Given my subject line, your single sentence response begins with the
impression that you were talking about Tibet being taken over when you
talked about "their country". But when you started talking about
making "them a minority", you are comparing them also with A, B, and
C, where A = Tibet, B = Xin Jiang, and C = Inner Mongolia.
So, it appears that you were comparing A with A and B and C.
While it may be logical admissible, it does not make sense to compare
A with A in a linguistic context where words are conveyed to mean
something for communication purposes. It is especially true when A
does not compare well with B or C.
While A can vacuously compare with A itself, it contributes to no
information.
A does not compare well with B because ethnic Tibetans remain the
majority of the TAR while it is possible that ethnic Han Chinese are
getting to be comparable in numbers to the Uighurs.
A also does not compare well with C because there is not a comparable
ethnic struggle in Inner Mongolia.
Furthermore, the critical issue of political importance is that A and
B and C have all been a part of China long before the communists took
>That is no excuse to take over their country and make them a minority
>as China is doing in Tibet , Xin Jiang and Inner Mongolia
But your statement indicates that you are very, very confused.
Given my subject line, your single sentence response begins with the
impression that you were talking about Tibet being taken over when you
talked about "their country". But when you started talking about
making "them a minority", you are comparing them also with A, B, and
C, where A = Tibet, B = Xin Jiang, and C = Inner Mongolia.
So, it appears that you were comparing A with A and B and C.
While it may be logical admissible, it does not make sense to compare
A with A in a linguistic context where words are conveyed to mean
something for communication purposes. It is especially true when A
does not compare well with B or C.
While A can vacuously compare with A itself, it contributes to no
information.
A does not compare well with B because ethnic Tibetans remain the
majority of the TAR while it is possible that ethnic Han Chinese are
getting to be comparable in numbers to the Uighurs.
A also does not compare well with C because there is not a comparable
ethnic struggle in Inner Mongolia.
Furthermore, the critical issue of political importance is that A and
over. Just compare the map of China in the Qing dynasty (for nearly
three hundred years of history) with the current one and compare the
map of the Republic of China (1911-1949) with the current Chinese map,
and you will see that the current map contains no more territory than
its two predecessors. In fact, the ROC claimed Outer Mongolia as its
own, which is a large piece of land, just as its predecessor did but
three hundred years of history) with the current one and compare the
map of the Republic of China (1911-1949) with the current Chinese map,
and you will see that the current map contains no more territory than
its two predecessors. In fact, the ROC claimed Outer Mongolia as its
China does not. But all of them claim A, B, and C as part of its
territory.
So, there is no basis to talk about China "taking over" A, or B, or C,
regardless of the ethnic composition in those areas.
As to ethnic composition in any region in the world, it changes all
the time. As long as sovereignty is not a question, there is no basis
for a complaint about ethnic composition, unless you do not believe in
the freedom of movement within a country.
territory.
So, there is no basis to talk about China "taking over" A, or B, or C,
regardless of the ethnic composition in those areas.
As to ethnic composition in any region in the world, it changes all
the time. As long as sovereignty is not a question, there is no basis
for a complaint about ethnic composition, unless you do not believe in
the freedom of movement within a country.
In the US, ethnic composition has changed rapidly in recent years.
Only petty sour grapes types complain about the hispanic population
becoming the majority in such and such a state.
Only petty sour grapes types complain about the hispanic population
Of course, the US killed all the American Indians to become what it is
today. China has not pursued such a policy. There is no evidence
that China's policy in Tibet is meant to harm ethnic Tibetans. It is
pure VOA, RFA type propaganda in collaboration with Da Lama and his
TGIE cohorts.
Now consider the fact that some Tibetans count the Mongols as their
forebears and thus lamented the loss of its past glory. So, a legit
My guess is you can't blame the CCP for robbing it from the Mongols or
for more than some four score and x number of years, the Tibetan
lamas stayed alive only by agreeing to be somebody else's vassal or
tributory state.
Of course, the Chinese suffered their own humiliation before the whole
world when Imperial Japan and colonialists from the West entered China
Of course, the Chinese suffered their own humiliation before the whole
at will and carved up its prime real estate along the coasts. And
when a group of Chinese believed that with righteousness, they could
fight off the invaders with their own bare fists, they got shot dead
right away or if they got captured, their heads got chopped off with
the shiny swords the imperial Japanese soldiers wielded in full public
view. One can relive such grusome moments by viewing photos from
fight off the invaders with their own bare fists, they got shot dead
right away or if they got captured, their heads got chopped off with
the shiny swords the imperial Japanese soldiers wielded in full public
view. One can relive such grusome moments by viewing photos from
history books.
At least the intellectuals among the Chinese people at the time knew
what was wrong. They looked inside themselves. And they fought their
way out.
But let's focus on these three groups that existed in China: the
At least the intellectuals among the Chinese people at the time knew
what was wrong. They looked inside themselves. And they fought their
way out.
But let's focus on these three groups that existed in China: the
Tibetans under the lamas, the Nationalist soldiers, and the communists
along with their peasant allies. We know that the lives of the lamas
were extremely decadent while the masses were illiterate and
relentlessly exploited. (In Heinrich Harrer's Seven Years in Tibet,
he recounted the first dinner he was invited to have dinner with the
"Holy Mother", i.e., the mother of Da Lama and the record-holder of
being the mother of the largest number of Incarnations, he counted 40
dishes at the banquet of many guests. And this was happening among
the Tibetans in the "noble class" while the masses had to work from
morning to dark, panting and moaning at the hard work they had to do
to survive. Tibet under the Lamas was clearly heading to trouble
because the system was so inequitable.) And we also know that the
Nationalist under Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek was getting U.S.
military and economic aide to fight the communists. But who was
relentlessly exploited. (In Heinrich Harrer's Seven Years in Tibet,
he recounted the first dinner he was invited to have dinner with the
"Holy Mother", i.e., the mother of Da Lama and the record-holder of
being the mother of the largest number of Incarnations, he counted 40
dishes at the banquet of many guests. And this was happening among
the Tibetans in the "noble class" while the masses had to work from
morning to dark, panting and moaning at the hard work they had to do
to survive. Tibet under the Lamas was clearly heading to trouble
because the system was so inequitable.) And we also know that the
Nationalist under Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek was getting U.S.
supplying the communist guerrilla soldiers? Hardly anyone, except
maybe the Soviet Union. They might have given them so rifles,
grenades, and ammunition. Mostly, on a one-on-one basis, they were
poorly equipped and could not have fought off the Nationalists, not to
defeat them.
The fact that the communists successfully took over China, with little
poorly equipped and could not have fought off the Nationalists, not to
defeat them.
fighting, shows that they won by the force of logic - not by force of
luck.
So, of course, the Nationalists could afford only a token presence in
luck.
Tibet despite their assertion of sovereignty over it. But the
decadence of the lamas shows through because they thought they had
nothing to worry about when the world was actually passing them by.
decadence of the lamas shows through because they thought they had
nothing to worry about when the world was actually passing them by.
But everyone should be able to see that the complaints concerning the
way Tibet is governed today mostly come from the monks. Of course,
they complain. They have lost their past glory and the last vestige
of influence of the masses.
But there is no objective reason as to why the corrupt monk system
should not be replaced by an egalitarian one - which the communists
brought in and eventually imposed.
China's current position in Tibet did not arise from a vacuum.
brought in and eventually imposed.
China's current position in Tibet did not arise from a vacuum.
It is particularly not a result of some evil doing on China's part,
despite western rhetoric.
China was able to go in because the lamas system had rotted to the
core.
If Tibet were a reasonable "country" and if it were a matter of brute
like Nazi Germany was kicked out from the Soviet Union after some 26
million Soviet lives had been lost resisting or fighting the Nazi
invaders.
(The 26 million figure is taken from a wikipedia article on losses by
countries during WWII.)
And if China were using overwhelming force like the U.S. has been
using in Afghanistan and Iraq to gain control of the countries, then
China would still be spending billions, if not tens of billions, per
month fighting an insurgency or hiring military contractors to do it
just as the US has.
And had China been compelled to fight an insurgency war anywhere in
the world since 1950, she would have been surely and totally broke!
China has clearly neither the Nazi Germany or the US/NATO problems.
Thus, it is hard to see that Tibet is ever under Chinese occupation.
And there are of course strong reasons for the difference.
invaders.
(The 26 million figure is taken from a wikipedia article on losses by
countries during WWII.)
And if China were using overwhelming force like the U.S. has been
using in Afghanistan and Iraq to gain control of the countries, then
China would still be spending billions, if not tens of billions, per
month fighting an insurgency or hiring military contractors to do it
just as the US has.
And had China been compelled to fight an insurgency war anywhere in
the world since 1950, she would have been surely and totally broke!
China has clearly neither the Nazi Germany or the US/NATO problems.
Thus, it is hard to see that Tibet is ever under Chinese occupation.
And there are of course strong reasons for the difference.
First, Tibet had a rotten system that had to be replaced and millions
who needed to be liberated from the lamas and the landowners. And we
have had a glimpse into that unspeakably dark past of that region when
the non-producing lamas ran amok in Heinricc Harrer's Seven Years of
Tibet. And many Tibetans today can attest to the social progress made
in the region. In fact, Harrer gave examples of the cruelty he had
personally witnessed, including cases in which he thought were more
inhumane than the death penalty.
As for the perception that substantive progress has actually been made
in Tibet, I will quote Cui Yuying, a contemporary Tibetan Chinese who
tells us that the lamas politics should remain buried in the past.
(See article attached below.)
Second, Tibet has never been a foreign land that China had to enter
and waste billions after billions on just trying to subdue. No air
raid in the stealth of night, no missiles, no bullets, no military
who needed to be liberated from the lamas and the landowners. And we
have had a glimpse into that unspeakably dark past of that region when
the non-producing lamas ran amok in Heinricc Harrer's Seven Years of
Tibet. And many Tibetans today can attest to the social progress made
in the region. In fact, Harrer gave examples of the cruelty he had
personally witnessed, including cases in which he thought were more
inhumane than the death penalty.
As for the perception that substantive progress has actually been made
in Tibet, I will quote Cui Yuying, a contemporary Tibetan Chinese who
tells us that the lamas politics should remain buried in the past.
(See article attached below.)
Second, Tibet has never been a foreign land that China had to enter
and waste billions after billions on just trying to subdue. No air
contractors and tens of millions of dollars of bribes to a puppet
government.
government.
For sure, China still has a Tibet problem. But as long as the U.S. is
spending a few billions each year to destabilize China through Tibet,
and to a lesser extent, Xinjiang, then China has to spend some money
spending a few billions each year to destabilize China through Tibet,
and to a lesser extent, Xinjiang, then China has to spend some money
to fight that off. Besides, nobody is able to tell whether it is
indigenuous or externally caused. And since no western political
system today is willing to tolerate a system where monks make all
political decisions, the West's support for the Dalai Lama and his
TGIE cohorts cannot be viewed in any other way except with suspicion.
indigenuous or externally caused. And since no western political
system today is willing to tolerate a system where monks make all
political decisions, the West's support for the Dalai Lama and his
TGIE cohorts cannot be viewed in any other way except with suspicion.
But Tibet is not China's Afghanistan or Iraq.
lo yeeOn
lo yeeOn
lo yeeOn
May 16, 2013, 9:54:23 PM5/16/13
to
>That is no excuse to take over their country and make them a minority
>as China is doing in Tibet , Xin Jiang and Inner Mongolia
>as China is doing in Tibet , Xin Jiang and Inner Mongolia
The Progressive Voice
May 17, 2013, 2:33:33 PM5/17/13
to
On May 15, 11:56 am, Wusong <wuso...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
>
> When confronted again, all you could say was "go suck up to your
> racist friend house nigger"
I see you use the term "House Nigger" to describe Albert K Fung. I
>
> When confronted again, all you could say was "go suck up to your
> racist friend house nigger"
must have put words in your limited english vocabulary of a mouth
lo yeeOn
May 18, 2013, 2:26:01 AM5/18/13
to
In article <4a5ec04d-dae1-46a2...@qc10g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,
>If Tibet was such a happy place for the Tibetans, then why did over a
>100 tibetans set themselves on fire to protest chinese communist rule
For as long as the US Congress is spending billions of dollars on
destabilizing Tibet each year using Da Lama and his TGIE cohorts, only
the die-hards will believe that the vulnerable children and young
mothers who went to burn themselves to death while calling for Da Lama
to return and live for ten thousand years to live are genuinely
expressing unhappiness. It is also such a fallacy that 100 cases
of self-immolation is any fair indication of the preference of six
million Tibetans in China. 100 cases involved 100 Tibetans. Ok, we
can all agree to that. But 100 does not equal 6,000,000! It's not
even close.
In fact, Tibetans don't want repatriation of Dalai Lama, according to
Chinese Vice Minister Cui Yuying - a prominent ethnic Tibetan Chinese
woman.
So I, as well as many others, do believe that the self-immolations are
concocted by the exiles, such as the Free Tibet die-hards and their
allies inside the TGIE and some monks with some monasteries in China,
in collaboration with their financial backers from the West.
As for your other comments, here are my responses:
Tom Jigme Wheat wrote in response to my comment (lines begin with >):
> The fact that the communists successfully took over China, with
> little fighting, shows that they won by the force of logic - not by
> force of luck.
>
> So, of course, the Nationalists could afford only a token presence
> in Tibet despite their assertion of sovereignty over it.
What source do you cite other than the CCP that China had sovereignty
over tibet during the Nationalist phase of its history. It is common
knowlege that Tibet declared independence with the fall of the Qing
dynasty in 1911 - 1912, and maintained that independence since 1951.
I have done it many times: just check any ROC (that's the "Republic of
China", i.e., tne Nationalists, not the CCP) map on the internet.
Likewise, any Chinese map during the Qing dynasty (also not the CCP).
http://www.nzhistory.net.nz/media/photo/map-republic-china-1917
https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRYRMMphmPY4_K7uQOxo8SJe3pP5j-fh0lcHnwDV0Pr6RZyBjP_AQ
Ok? You could have looked it up yourself. Stop being so lazy next
time.
So what if "Tibet declared independence with the fall of the Qing
dynasty in 1911 - 1912"? It doesn't mean anything.
During the fall of Qing, everybody declared independence, including
the populous province of Guangdong. And Guangdong remains a part of
China (despite its 1912 declaration).
Other provinces that declared independence:
Fujian independence
Guangdong independence
Shandong independence
Sichuan independence
Tibetan independence
Mongolian independence
And Taiwan and many other provinces called their revolts "uprisings".
The South of the U.S. also declared independence. That doesn't mean
that the South was ever a separate country from the U.S.!
Tibet was always considered a province of China. Nobody, especially
not Da Lama, ever maintained a kind of independence from China,
whether it was before or "since 1951."
Check out the Wikipedia article on Xinhai Revolution of China.
-----
Tom Jigme Wheat in response to my comment:
> But there is no objective reason as to why the corrupt monk system
> should not be replaced by an egalitarian one - which the communists
> brought in and eventually imposed.
How was it not egalitarian compared to the qing. The monks were
cellibate and the leader of the country, the dalai lama came from
the peasant classes.
Tom Jigme Wheat, you are comparing oranges with apples!
You were comparing Tibet in 1949 with Qing before 1911, right?
How stupid!
China was heading for humiliation under the Qing. The imperial
Japanese, the US, and the Europeans were greeting the Chinese with
swords, guns, canons, and bayonets. The Chinese people finally
recognized that they themselves were to blame for the humiliation they
received from the foreigners. Yet, Dalai Lamas 13 and 14 were
spending the same period (1911-1951) busy building palace after palace
at Norbulingka while the mother of Da Lama (number 14), i.e., the
Mother of the most Incarnations in Tibetan Buddhism, were treating the
members of the ruling class in Lhasa with a 40-course banquet at the
month-old celebration of her young child. And while not even Qing had
the institution of serfdom, Tibet had a system of owning serfs until
the CCP went in and liberated them. So, how is it not true that only
the communists brought egalitarianism into TIbet?
-----
Tom Jigme Wheat responded to my previous post:
> China was able to go in because the lamas system had rotted to the
> core.
No Independent Tibet got in the way of the Imperialist designs of
the CCP. That's why they describe the old system as so corrupt. If
it was really better in Tibet under Communist rule Tibetans would'nt
be setting themselves on fire, and we would have a Tibetan Governor.
For as long as there is a massive effort to destabilize Tibet from
outside with a lot of US taxpayer money, protests and even
self-immolations are the result.
And Tibet does have a Tibetan as governor.
This has always been the case.
According to the Wikipedia, the Tibet Autonomous Region is a
province-level entity of the People's Republic of China. It is
governed by a People's Government, led by a Chairman. The current
Chairman is Losang Jamcan.
--------
Tom Jigme Wehat responded to my previous post:
> If Tibet were a reasonable "country" and if it were a matter of brute
> force on the Chinese communists' part, they would have been kicked out
> like Nazi Germany was kicked out from the Soviet Union after some 26
> million Soviet lives had been lost resisting or fighting the Nazi
> invaders.
There was 6 million Tibetans in Tibet and 400 million chinese. You can
easily do the math. The PLA overwhelmed them with numbers.
The point is: to the Tibetans, regardless of numbers, the Chinese did
nothing of the sort the Nazi Germany did to the Soviet Union. The
Soviet Union was also a much more populous country than Germany. But
Germany was the invader and slaughtered the Soviets but China has not
been an invader of Tibet and it did not slaughter the Tibetans in
any way remotely like Germany slaughtered the Soviet citizens.
Finally, Germany and the USSR were distinct countries but Tibet has
always been only a province of China - nothing more. Nothing more
because the lamas were too corrupt to assert their manhood.
-----
Tom Jigme Wehat responded to my previous post:
> And if China were using overwhelming force like the U.S. has been
> using in Afghanistan and Iraq to gain control of the countries, then
> China would still be spending billions, if not tens of billions, per
> month fighting an insurgency or hiring military contractors to do it
> just as the US has.
The only reason we have an insurgency in Afghanistan and Iraq is
because we follow international standards of decency in war. If we
didn't we would be bombing full population centers were the
insurgents are located like the russians did in Afghanistan.
The US follows international standards of decency to invade and occupy
other countries thousands of miles away while China does not follow
international standards of decency to invade and occupy other
countries?
China under the CCP has not invaded or occupied any country. So,
maybe it is moot to talk about following any standards.
But don't make us laugh. China under the CCP has always been careful
to only pursue peaceful developments.
On the other hand, the US devastated both Iraq and Afghanistan. We
used mass deception to destroy Iraq. The rationale for invading and
occupying Afghanistan is equally dubious!
We did not follow "international standards of decency in war". And we
even killed the 16 yo American citizen Abdulraman al-Awlaki. We
destroyed whole cities like Fallujah and reduced Sirte of Libya to
rubble. When you talk like this, you lose all credibility to speak
for the Tibetans.
Finally, you still did not explain how Tibet has fallen so low since
the days of Genghis Khan, which was the theme of my original reply to
Habshi's one-liner claim that Tibet was a country and China invaded
it. Neither he nor you has made any attempt to clarify the picture.
lo yeeOn
-----
Subject: The justice system in Tibet as run by the lamas before 1949
was not only unjust but cruel, according to Heinrich Harrer Re:
>> So, of course, the Nationalists could afford only token presence in
of that region when the non-producing lamas ran amok in Heinrich
like Nazi Germany was kicked out from the Soviet Union, even after
The Progressive Voice <thomasw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On May 16, 6:54 pm, acous...@panix.com (lo yeeOn) wrote:
>100 tibetans set themselves on fire to protest chinese communist rule
For as long as the US Congress is spending billions of dollars on
destabilizing Tibet each year using Da Lama and his TGIE cohorts, only
the die-hards will believe that the vulnerable children and young
mothers who went to burn themselves to death while calling for Da Lama
to return and live for ten thousand years to live are genuinely
expressing unhappiness. It is also such a fallacy that 100 cases
of self-immolation is any fair indication of the preference of six
million Tibetans in China. 100 cases involved 100 Tibetans. Ok, we
can all agree to that. But 100 does not equal 6,000,000! It's not
even close.
In fact, Tibetans don't want repatriation of Dalai Lama, according to
Chinese Vice Minister Cui Yuying - a prominent ethnic Tibetan Chinese
woman.
So I, as well as many others, do believe that the self-immolations are
concocted by the exiles, such as the Free Tibet die-hards and their
allies inside the TGIE and some monks with some monasteries in China,
in collaboration with their financial backers from the West.
As for your other comments, here are my responses:
Tom Jigme Wheat wrote in response to my comment (lines begin with >):
> The fact that the communists successfully took over China, with
> little fighting, shows that they won by the force of logic - not by
> force of luck.
>
> So, of course, the Nationalists could afford only a token presence
> in Tibet despite their assertion of sovereignty over it.
over tibet during the Nationalist phase of its history. It is common
knowlege that Tibet declared independence with the fall of the Qing
dynasty in 1911 - 1912, and maintained that independence since 1951.
I have done it many times: just check any ROC (that's the "Republic of
China", i.e., tne Nationalists, not the CCP) map on the internet.
Likewise, any Chinese map during the Qing dynasty (also not the CCP).
http://www.nzhistory.net.nz/media/photo/map-republic-china-1917
https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRYRMMphmPY4_K7uQOxo8SJe3pP5j-fh0lcHnwDV0Pr6RZyBjP_AQ
Ok? You could have looked it up yourself. Stop being so lazy next
time.
So what if "Tibet declared independence with the fall of the Qing
dynasty in 1911 - 1912"? It doesn't mean anything.
During the fall of Qing, everybody declared independence, including
the populous province of Guangdong. And Guangdong remains a part of
China (despite its 1912 declaration).
Other provinces that declared independence:
Fujian independence
Guangdong independence
Shandong independence
Sichuan independence
Tibetan independence
Mongolian independence
And Taiwan and many other provinces called their revolts "uprisings".
The South of the U.S. also declared independence. That doesn't mean
that the South was ever a separate country from the U.S.!
Tibet was always considered a province of China. Nobody, especially
not Da Lama, ever maintained a kind of independence from China,
whether it was before or "since 1951."
Check out the Wikipedia article on Xinhai Revolution of China.
-----
Tom Jigme Wheat in response to my comment:
> But there is no objective reason as to why the corrupt monk system
> should not be replaced by an egalitarian one - which the communists
> brought in and eventually imposed.
cellibate and the leader of the country, the dalai lama came from
the peasant classes.
Tom Jigme Wheat, you are comparing oranges with apples!
You were comparing Tibet in 1949 with Qing before 1911, right?
How stupid!
China was heading for humiliation under the Qing. The imperial
Japanese, the US, and the Europeans were greeting the Chinese with
swords, guns, canons, and bayonets. The Chinese people finally
recognized that they themselves were to blame for the humiliation they
received from the foreigners. Yet, Dalai Lamas 13 and 14 were
spending the same period (1911-1951) busy building palace after palace
at Norbulingka while the mother of Da Lama (number 14), i.e., the
Mother of the most Incarnations in Tibetan Buddhism, were treating the
members of the ruling class in Lhasa with a 40-course banquet at the
month-old celebration of her young child. And while not even Qing had
the institution of serfdom, Tibet had a system of owning serfs until
the CCP went in and liberated them. So, how is it not true that only
the communists brought egalitarianism into TIbet?
-----
Tom Jigme Wheat responded to my previous post:
> China was able to go in because the lamas system had rotted to the
> core.
the CCP. That's why they describe the old system as so corrupt. If
it was really better in Tibet under Communist rule Tibetans would'nt
be setting themselves on fire, and we would have a Tibetan Governor.
For as long as there is a massive effort to destabilize Tibet from
outside with a lot of US taxpayer money, protests and even
self-immolations are the result.
And Tibet does have a Tibetan as governor.
This has always been the case.
According to the Wikipedia, the Tibet Autonomous Region is a
province-level entity of the People's Republic of China. It is
governed by a People's Government, led by a Chairman. The current
Chairman is Losang Jamcan.
--------
Tom Jigme Wehat responded to my previous post:
> If Tibet were a reasonable "country" and if it were a matter of brute
> force on the Chinese communists' part, they would have been kicked out
> like Nazi Germany was kicked out from the Soviet Union after some 26
> million Soviet lives had been lost resisting or fighting the Nazi
> invaders.
easily do the math. The PLA overwhelmed them with numbers.
The point is: to the Tibetans, regardless of numbers, the Chinese did
nothing of the sort the Nazi Germany did to the Soviet Union. The
Soviet Union was also a much more populous country than Germany. But
Germany was the invader and slaughtered the Soviets but China has not
been an invader of Tibet and it did not slaughter the Tibetans in
any way remotely like Germany slaughtered the Soviet citizens.
Finally, Germany and the USSR were distinct countries but Tibet has
always been only a province of China - nothing more. Nothing more
because the lamas were too corrupt to assert their manhood.
-----
Tom Jigme Wehat responded to my previous post:
> And if China were using overwhelming force like the U.S. has been
> using in Afghanistan and Iraq to gain control of the countries, then
> China would still be spending billions, if not tens of billions, per
> month fighting an insurgency or hiring military contractors to do it
> just as the US has.
because we follow international standards of decency in war. If we
didn't we would be bombing full population centers were the
insurgents are located like the russians did in Afghanistan.
The US follows international standards of decency to invade and occupy
other countries thousands of miles away while China does not follow
international standards of decency to invade and occupy other
countries?
China under the CCP has not invaded or occupied any country. So,
maybe it is moot to talk about following any standards.
But don't make us laugh. China under the CCP has always been careful
to only pursue peaceful developments.
On the other hand, the US devastated both Iraq and Afghanistan. We
used mass deception to destroy Iraq. The rationale for invading and
occupying Afghanistan is equally dubious!
We did not follow "international standards of decency in war". And we
even killed the 16 yo American citizen Abdulraman al-Awlaki. We
destroyed whole cities like Fallujah and reduced Sirte of Libya to
rubble. When you talk like this, you lose all credibility to speak
for the Tibetans.
Finally, you still did not explain how Tibet has fallen so low since
the days of Genghis Khan, which was the theme of my original reply to
Habshi's one-liner claim that Tibet was a country and China invaded
it. Neither he nor you has made any attempt to clarify the picture.
lo yeeOn
-----
Subject: The justice system in Tibet as run by the lamas before 1949
was not only unjust but cruel, according to Heinrich Harrer Re:
Explain how Tibet evolved from its Genghis Khan days of glory to a
time when the CIA's modern weapons and logistics could not help Da
Lama and his troops to resist the PLA for more than a few weeks -
something was rotten in Potala Palace with the lamas! Re: The Dark
Ages in Tibet under the rule of the Lamas are thankfully gone
time when the CIA's modern weapons and logistics could not help Da
Lama and his troops to resist the PLA for more than a few weeks -
something was rotten in Potala Palace with the lamas! Re: The Dark
Ages in Tibet under the rule of the Lamas are thankfully gone
In article <5db27a86-72b3-465d...@a10g2000pbr.googlegroups.com>,
The Progressive Voice <thomasw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On May 11, 6:45��pm, acous...@panix.com (lo yeeOn) wrote:
The Progressive Voice <thomasw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On May 11, 6:45��pm, acous...@panix.com (lo yeeOn) wrote:
>> Tibet despite their assertion of sovereignty over it. ��But the
>> decadence of the lamas shows through because they thought they had
>> nothing to worry about when the world was actually passing them by.
>>
>> decadence of the lamas shows through because they thought they had
>> nothing to worry about when the world was actually passing them by.
>>
Replacement of some broken paragraphs I hastily presented last time:
[China's current position in Tibet did not arise from a vacuum. It
is particularly not a result of some evil doing on China's part,
despite western rhetoric. China was able to go in because the lamas
system had rotted to the core. If Tibet were a reasonable "country"
and if it were a matter of brute force on the Chinese communists'
part, they would have been kicked out like Nazi Germany was kicked
out from the Soviet Union, even after some 26 million Soviet lives
despite western rhetoric. China was able to go in because the lamas
system had rotted to the core. If Tibet were a reasonable "country"
and if it were a matter of brute force on the Chinese communists'
part, they would have been kicked out like Nazi Germany was kicked
had been lost resisting or fighting the Nazi invaders.
(The 26 million figure is taken from a Wikipedia article on losses
by countries during WWII.)
And if China were using overwhelming force like the U.S. has been
using in Afghanistan and Iraq to gain control of the countries, then
China would still be spending billions, if not tens of billions, per
month fighting an insurgency or hiring military contractors to do it
just as the US has.
And had China been compelled to fight an insurgency war anywhere in
the world since 1950, she would have been surely and totally broke!
China has clearly neither the Nazi Germany or the US/NATO problems.
Thus, it is hard to see that Tibet is ever under Chinese occupation.
And there are of course strong reasons for the difference.
First, Tibet had a rotten system that had to be replaced and
millions who needed to be liberated from the lamas and the
landowners. And have had a glimpse into that unspeakably dark past
And if China were using overwhelming force like the U.S. has been
using in Afghanistan and Iraq to gain control of the countries, then
China would still be spending billions, if not tens of billions, per
month fighting an insurgency or hiring military contractors to do it
just as the US has.
And had China been compelled to fight an insurgency war anywhere in
the world since 1950, she would have been surely and totally broke!
China has clearly neither the Nazi Germany or the US/NATO problems.
Thus, it is hard to see that Tibet is ever under Chinese occupation.
And there are of course strong reasons for the difference.
First, Tibet had a rotten system that had to be replaced and
millions who needed to be liberated from the lamas and the
of that region when the non-producing lamas ran amok in Heinrich
Harrer's Seven Years of Tibet. And many Tibetans today can attest
to the social progress made in the region. In fact, Harrer gave
examples of the cruelty he had personally witnessed, including cases
in which he thought were more inhumane than the death penalty.
to the social progress made in the region. In fact, Harrer gave
examples of the cruelty he had personally witnessed, including cases
in which he thought were more inhumane than the death penalty.
. . . (long addition - please see attachment below)]
>
>There is no evidence that the degree of exploitation prevelant in
>china was the same in Tibet. Remember Tibet outloawed the death
>penalty in 1912.
I am sorry a) I fail to parse the first sentence of your response and
b) I have realized that I had some incomplete sentences in my previous
post that might have confused you too.
So, I have inserted a replacement for the broken paragraphs that might
have caused confusion for my readers. And I am also attaching the
entire post (with the current edit) right after my signature so that
maybe you Tom Jigme Wheat can clarify what you wanted to say.
But as far as the death penalty being outlawed in 1912, which even if
I believe it, does not diminish the degree of cruelty in the justice
system set up and run by the lamas between 1912-1949. I have read
plenty of stories in Heinrich Harrer's Seven Years in Tibet which
together painted a grim picture of cruelty under Da Lama's sytem of
justice.
lo yeeOn
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
A corrected edition though no guarantee that it is error free.
>
>There is no evidence that the degree of exploitation prevelant in
>china was the same in Tibet. Remember Tibet outloawed the death
>penalty in 1912.
I am sorry a) I fail to parse the first sentence of your response and
b) I have realized that I had some incomplete sentences in my previous
post that might have confused you too.
So, I have inserted a replacement for the broken paragraphs that might
have caused confusion for my readers. And I am also attaching the
entire post (with the current edit) right after my signature so that
maybe you Tom Jigme Wheat can clarify what you wanted to say.
But as far as the death penalty being outlawed in 1912, which even if
I believe it, does not diminish the degree of cruelty in the justice
system set up and run by the lamas between 1912-1949. I have read
plenty of stories in Heinrich Harrer's Seven Years in Tibet which
together painted a grim picture of cruelty under Da Lama's sytem of
justice.
lo yeeOn
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
A corrected edition though no guarantee that it is error free.
Subject: Explain how Tibet evolved from its Genghis Khan days of glory
to a time when the CIA's modern weapons and logistics could not help
Da Lama and his troops to resist the PLA for more than a few weeks -
something was rotten in Potala Palace with the lamas! Re: The Dark
Ages in Tibet under the rule of the Lamas are thankfully gone
to a time when the CIA's modern weapons and logistics could not help
Da Lama and his troops to resist the PLA for more than a few weeks -
something was rotten in Potala Palace with the lamas! Re: The Dark
Ages in Tibet under the rule of the Lamas are thankfully gone
some 26 million Soviet lives had been lost resisting or fighting the
Nazi invaders.
(The 26 million figure is taken from a Wikipedia article on losses by
Nazi invaders.
lo yeeOn
May 19, 2013, 2:36:34 AM5/19/13
to
In article <4a5ec04d-dae1-46a2...@qc10g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,
The Progressive Voice <thomasw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On May 16, 6:54 pm, acous...@panix.com (lo yeeOn) wrote:
The Progressive Voice <thomasw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On May 16, 6:54 pm, acous...@panix.com (lo yeeOn) wrote:
>If Tibet was such a happy place for the Tibetans, then why did over a
>100 tibetans set themselves on fire to protest chinese communist rule
For as long as the US Congress is spending billions of dollars on
destabilizing Tibet each year using Da Lama and his TGIE cohorts, only
the die-hards will believe that the vulnerable children and young
mothers who went to burn themselves to death while calling for Da Lama
to return and live for ten thousand years are genuinely expressing
>100 tibetans set themselves on fire to protest chinese communist rule
For as long as the US Congress is spending billions of dollars on
destabilizing Tibet each year using Da Lama and his TGIE cohorts, only
the die-hards will believe that the vulnerable children and young
mothers who went to burn themselves to death while calling for Da Lama
unhappiness. It is also such a fallacy that 100 cases of
self-immolation is any fair indication of the preference of six
million Tibetans in China. 100 cases involved 100 Tibetans. Ok, we
can all agree to that. But 100 does not equal 6,000,000! It's not
even close.
In fact, Tibetans don't want repatriation of Dalai Lama, according to
Chinese Vice Minister Cui Yuying - a prominent ethnic Tibetan Chinese
woman.
So I, as well as many others, do believe that the self-immolations are
concocted by the exiles, such as the Free Tibet die-hards and their
allies inside the TGIE and some monks with some monasteries in China,
in collaboration with their financial backers from the West.
As for your other comments, here are my responses:
Tom Jigme Wheat wrote in response to my comment (lines begin with >):
self-immolation is any fair indication of the preference of six
million Tibetans in China. 100 cases involved 100 Tibetans. Ok, we
can all agree to that. But 100 does not equal 6,000,000! It's not
even close.
In fact, Tibetans don't want repatriation of Dalai Lama, according to
Chinese Vice Minister Cui Yuying - a prominent ethnic Tibetan Chinese
woman.
So I, as well as many others, do believe that the self-immolations are
concocted by the exiles, such as the Free Tibet die-hards and their
allies inside the TGIE and some monks with some monasteries in China,
in collaboration with their financial backers from the West.
As for your other comments, here are my responses:
Tom Jigme Wheat wrote in response to my comment (lines begin with >):
> The fact that the communists successfully took over China, with
> little fighting, shows that they won by the force of logic - not by
> force of luck.
>
> So, of course, the Nationalists could afford only a token presence
> in Tibet despite their assertion of sovereignty over it.
> little fighting, shows that they won by the force of logic - not by
> force of luck.
>
> So, of course, the Nationalists could afford only a token presence
> in Tibet despite their assertion of sovereignty over it.
What source do you cite other than the CCP that China had sovereignty
over tibet during the Nationalist phase of its history. It is common
knowlege that Tibet declared independence with the fall of the Qing
dynasty in 1911 - 1912, and maintained that independence since 1951.
I have done it many times: just check any ROC (that's the "Republic of
China", i.e., the Nationalists, not the CCP) map on the internet.
over tibet during the Nationalist phase of its history. It is common
knowlege that Tibet declared independence with the fall of the Qing
dynasty in 1911 - 1912, and maintained that independence since 1951.
I have done it many times: just check any ROC (that's the "Republic of
Likewise, any Chinese map during the Qing dynasty (also not the CCP).
http://www.nzhistory.net.nz/media/photo/map-republic-china-1917
https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRYRMMphmPY4_K7uQOxo8SJe3pP5j-fh0lcHnwDV0Pr6RZyBjP_AQ
Ok? You could have looked it up yourself. Stop being so lazy next
time.
So what if "Tibet declared independence with the fall of the Qing
dynasty in 1911 - 1912"? It doesn't mean anything.
During the fall of Qing, practically everybody declared independence,
http://www.nzhistory.net.nz/media/photo/map-republic-china-1917
https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRYRMMphmPY4_K7uQOxo8SJe3pP5j-fh0lcHnwDV0Pr6RZyBjP_AQ
Ok? You could have looked it up yourself. Stop being so lazy next
time.
So what if "Tibet declared independence with the fall of the Qing
dynasty in 1911 - 1912"? It doesn't mean anything.
including the populous province of Guangdong. And Guangdong remains a
part of China (despite its 1912 declaration).
Other provinces that also declared independence include (aside from
part of China (despite its 1912 declaration).
the rebel provinces of Guangdong and Tibet) Fujian, Shandong, Sichuan,
and Mongolia.
It was also the case that the PLA entered every Chinese province to
assert control as soon as the Nationalists had fled to Taiwan. Nobody
ever claims that Guangdong has become a land of occupation. That
means that neither did Tibet become a land of occupation, since both
of them have been a Chinese province and therefore have had the same
sort of political status within China for hundreds of years (since
1644) already.
Many other provinces, including Taiwan, also staged a revolt against
the waning Qing dynasty; but they called their revolts "uprisings".
Now the South of the U.S. also declared independence. That of course
doesn't mean that the South was ever a separate country from the U.S.!
People love to be independent; but not everyone has the wherewithal to
be independent. None of the Chinese provinces at the end of Qing had
it except for Mongolia. The Nationalists tried to deny them but they
failed.
Tibet was always considered a province of China. Nobody, especially
not Da Lama, ever maintained a kind of independence from China,
whether it was before or "since 1951."
Check out the Wikipedia article on Xinhai Revolution of China.
-----
Tom Jigme Wheat in response to my comment:
> But there is no objective reason as to why the corrupt monk system
> should not be replaced by an egalitarian one - which the communists
> brought in and eventually imposed.
> should not be replaced by an egalitarian one - which the communists
> brought in and eventually imposed.
How was it not egalitarian compared to the qing. The monks were
cellibate and the leader of the country, the dalai lama came from
the peasant classes.
Tom Jigme Wheat, you are comparing oranges with apples!
You were comparing Tibet in 1949 with Qing before 1911, right?
How stupid!
China was heading for humiliation under the Qing. The imperial
Japanese, the US, and the Europeans were greeting the Chinese with
swords, guns, canons, and bayonets. The Chinese people finally
recognized that they themselves were to blame for the humiliation they
received from the foreigners. Yet, Dalai Lamas 13 and 14 were
spending the same period (1911-1951) busy building palace after palace
at Norbulingka while the mother of Da Lama (number 14), i.e., the
Mother of the most Incarnations in Tibetan Buddhism, were treating the
members of the ruling class in Lhasa with a 40-course banquet at the
month-old celebration of her young child. And while not even Qing had
the institution of serfdom, Tibet had a system of owning serfs until
the CCP went in and liberated them. So, how is it not true that only
the communists brought egalitarianism into TIbet?
Also, that Da Lama came from a peasant family does not mean Tibet had
cellibate and the leader of the country, the dalai lama came from
the peasant classes.
Tom Jigme Wheat, you are comparing oranges with apples!
You were comparing Tibet in 1949 with Qing before 1911, right?
How stupid!
China was heading for humiliation under the Qing. The imperial
Japanese, the US, and the Europeans were greeting the Chinese with
swords, guns, canons, and bayonets. The Chinese people finally
recognized that they themselves were to blame for the humiliation they
received from the foreigners. Yet, Dalai Lamas 13 and 14 were
spending the same period (1911-1951) busy building palace after palace
at Norbulingka while the mother of Da Lama (number 14), i.e., the
Mother of the most Incarnations in Tibetan Buddhism, were treating the
members of the ruling class in Lhasa with a 40-course banquet at the
month-old celebration of her young child. And while not even Qing had
the institution of serfdom, Tibet had a system of owning serfs until
the CCP went in and liberated them. So, how is it not true that only
the communists brought egalitarianism into TIbet?
an egalitarian society. He and his family got lucky; but millions of
Tibetans remained mired in chronic poverty while the ruling class,
consisting of "noblemen" and lamas didn't have to work and did not
work while they feted each other with sumptuous meals regularly.
I mentioned that Da Lama's Mama was feasting the elite with a 40-meal
course banquet at the occasion of her youngest child's one-month after
birth celebration. The source is Heinrich Harrer's Seven Years in
Tibet. And the same book also has a photo showing a bunch of
well-dressed Tibetan people gathering for dinner. The caption under
the photo says: "A feast in the home of a nobleman in Lhasa: thirty
courses, three hours at table."
This elite group is not where Da Lama and his family came from before
he was selected by the lamas to be "the Dalai Lama". Of course if 5.4
million Tibetans were serfs or laborers, subtracting a dozen from them
and adding them to the 600,000 of the elite does not materially change
the welfare of the society under the rule of the lamas and landowners.
We have the same problem in this country even today. Adding Obama to
the ruling class has not at all empowered the 99% nor the African
American community. One can in fact argue that putting him in the
White House has actually hurt the cause of the African Americans
because the establishment and its propaganda machine would be quick to
dismiss any existing problems that concern the community as a
consequence of neglect because one of them is actually in the White
House and the Attorney General as well as the diplomat to the UN are
likewise of African descent, etc., etc. For example, the murder of
Trayvon Martin has been treated only as a typical city crime while it
would have been a crime of national importance because of the
stereotyping of the African American youths if it were not for Obama
and co being in power.
And not surprisingly, African American youths continue to have a high
dropout rate from school and account for a disproportionate fraction
of the nation's incarcerated population. It is just like someone from
the barrio bought a lotto ticket and won big. The 99.99% of the
people from the barrio remain impoverished and in despair, despite
this singular addition to the nouveau riche.
The Tibetan masses have known that for a long time. And that's why
Cui Yuying, the prominent Tibetan political leader in China today,
recently said that most Chinese Tibetans do not want Da Lama to return
to Tibet because his political agenda is at variance with that of the
majority of the Tibetan people. Now that is a powerful testimonial
against the desperate assertion that Tibet was an egalitarian society
in feudal Tibet because Da Lama came from a peasant family.
-----
Tom Jigme Wheat responded to my previous post:
> China was able to go in because the lamas system had rotted to the
> core.
> core.
No Independent Tibet got in the way of the Imperialist designs of
the CCP. That's why they describe the old system as so corrupt. If
it was really better in Tibet under Communist rule Tibetans would'nt
be setting themselves on fire, and we would have a Tibetan Governor.
For as long as there is a massive effort to destabilize Tibet from
outside with a lot of US taxpayer money, protests and even
self-immolations are the result.
And Tibet does have a Tibetan as governor.
This has always been the case.
According to the Wikipedia, the Tibet Autonomous Region is a
province-level entity of the People's Republic of China. It is
governed by a People's Government, led by a Chairman. The current
Chairman is Losang Jamcan.
--------
Tom Jigme Wehat responded to my previous post:
the CCP. That's why they describe the old system as so corrupt. If
it was really better in Tibet under Communist rule Tibetans would'nt
be setting themselves on fire, and we would have a Tibetan Governor.
For as long as there is a massive effort to destabilize Tibet from
outside with a lot of US taxpayer money, protests and even
self-immolations are the result.
And Tibet does have a Tibetan as governor.
This has always been the case.
According to the Wikipedia, the Tibet Autonomous Region is a
province-level entity of the People's Republic of China. It is
governed by a People's Government, led by a Chairman. The current
Chairman is Losang Jamcan.
--------
Tom Jigme Wehat responded to my previous post:
> If Tibet were a reasonable "country" and if it were a matter of brute
> force on the Chinese communists' part, they would have been kicked out
> like Nazi Germany was kicked out from the Soviet Union after some 26
> million Soviet lives had been lost resisting or fighting the Nazi
> invaders.
> force on the Chinese communists' part, they would have been kicked out
> like Nazi Germany was kicked out from the Soviet Union after some 26
> million Soviet lives had been lost resisting or fighting the Nazi
> invaders.
There was 6 million Tibetans in Tibet and 400 million chinese. You can
easily do the math. The PLA overwhelmed them with numbers.
The point is: to the Tibetans, regardless of numbers, the Chinese did
nothing of the sort the Nazi Germany did to the Soviet Union. The
Soviet Union was also a much more populous country than Germany. But
Germany was the invader and slaughtered the Soviets but China has not
been an invader of Tibet and it did not slaughter the Tibetans in
any way remotely like Germany slaughtered the Soviet citizens.
Finally, Germany and the USSR were distinct countries but Tibet has
always been only a province of China - nothing more. Nothing more
because the lamas were too corrupt to assert their manhood.
-----
Tom Jigme Wehat responded to my previous post:
easily do the math. The PLA overwhelmed them with numbers.
The point is: to the Tibetans, regardless of numbers, the Chinese did
nothing of the sort the Nazi Germany did to the Soviet Union. The
Soviet Union was also a much more populous country than Germany. But
Germany was the invader and slaughtered the Soviets but China has not
been an invader of Tibet and it did not slaughter the Tibetans in
any way remotely like Germany slaughtered the Soviet citizens.
Finally, Germany and the USSR were distinct countries but Tibet has
always been only a province of China - nothing more. Nothing more
because the lamas were too corrupt to assert their manhood.
-----
Tom Jigme Wehat responded to my previous post:
> And if China were using overwhelming force like the U.S. has been
> using in Afghanistan and Iraq to gain control of the countries, then
> China would still be spending billions, if not tens of billions, per
> month fighting an insurgency or hiring military contractors to do it
> just as the US has.
> using in Afghanistan and Iraq to gain control of the countries, then
> China would still be spending billions, if not tens of billions, per
> month fighting an insurgency or hiring military contractors to do it
> just as the US has.
>> Tibet despite their assertion of sovereignty over it. ��But the
>> decadence of the lamas shows through because they thought they had
>> nothing to worry about when the world was actually passing them by.
>>
>> decadence of the lamas shows through because they thought they had
>> nothing to worry about when the world was actually passing them by.
>>
Replacement of some broken paragraphs I hastily presented last time:
[China's current position in Tibet did not arise from a vacuum. It
is particularly not a result of some evil doing on China's part,
despite western rhetoric. China was able to go in because the lamas
system had rotted to the core. If Tibet were a reasonable "country"
and if it were a matter of brute force on the Chinese communists'
part, they would have been kicked out like Nazi Germany was kicked
out from the Soviet Union, even after some 26 million Soviet lives
despite western rhetoric. China was able to go in because the lamas
system had rotted to the core. If Tibet were a reasonable "country"
and if it were a matter of brute force on the Chinese communists'
part, they would have been kicked out like Nazi Germany was kicked
had been lost resisting or fighting the Nazi invaders.
(The 26 million figure is taken from a Wikipedia article on losses
by countries during WWII.)
And if China were using overwhelming force like the U.S. has been
using in Afghanistan and Iraq to gain control of the countries, then
China would still be spending billions, if not tens of billions, per
month fighting an insurgency or hiring military contractors to do it
just as the US has.
And had China been compelled to fight an insurgency war anywhere in
the world since 1950, she would have been surely and totally broke!
China has clearly neither the Nazi Germany or the US/NATO problems.
Thus, it is hard to see that Tibet is ever under Chinese occupation.
And there are of course strong reasons for the difference.
First, Tibet had a rotten system that had to be replaced and
millions who needed to be liberated from the lamas and the
landowners. And have had a glimpse into that unspeakably dark past
And if China were using overwhelming force like the U.S. has been
using in Afghanistan and Iraq to gain control of the countries, then
China would still be spending billions, if not tens of billions, per
month fighting an insurgency or hiring military contractors to do it
just as the US has.
And had China been compelled to fight an insurgency war anywhere in
the world since 1950, she would have been surely and totally broke!
China has clearly neither the Nazi Germany or the US/NATO problems.
Thus, it is hard to see that Tibet is ever under Chinese occupation.
And there are of course strong reasons for the difference.
First, Tibet had a rotten system that had to be replaced and
millions who needed to be liberated from the lamas and the
of that region when the non-producing lamas ran amok in Heinrich
Harrer's Seven Years of Tibet. And many Tibetans today can attest
to the social progress made in the region. In fact, Harrer gave
examples of the cruelty he had personally witnessed, including cases
in which he thought were more inhumane than the death penalty.
to the social progress made in the region. In fact, Harrer gave
examples of the cruelty he had personally witnessed, including cases
in which he thought were more inhumane than the death penalty.
some 26 million Soviet lives had been lost resisting or fighting the
Nazi invaders.
(The 26 million figure is taken from a Wikipedia article on losses by
Nazi invaders.
lo yeeOn
May 19, 2013, 2:59:04 AM5/19/13
to
In article <4a5ec04d-dae1-46a2...@qc10g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,
The Progressive Voice <thomasw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On May 16, 6:54 pm, acous...@panix.com (lo yeeOn) wrote:
The Progressive Voice <thomasw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On May 16, 6:54 pm, acous...@panix.com (lo yeeOn) wrote:
>If Tibet was such a happy place for the Tibetans, then why did over a
>100 tibetans set themselves on fire to protest chinese communist rule
For as long as the US Congress is spending billions of dollars on
destabilizing Tibet each year using Da Lama and his TGIE cohorts, only
the die-hards will believe that the vulnerable children and young
mothers who went to burn themselves to death while calling for Da Lama
to return and live for ten thousand years are genuinely expressing
unhappiness. It is also such a fallacy that 100 cases of
self-immolation is any fair indication of the preference of six
million Tibetans in China. 100 cases involved 100 Tibetans. Ok, we
can all agree to that. But 100 does not equal 6,000,000! It's not
even close.
In fact, Tibetans don't want repatriation of Dalai Lama, according to
Chinese Vice Minister Cui Yuying - a prominent ethnic Tibetan Chinese
woman.
So I, as well as many others, do believe that the self-immolations are
concocted by the exiles, such as the Free Tibet die-hards and their
allies inside the TGIE and some monks with some monasteries in China,
in collaboration with their financial backers from the West.
As for your other comments, here are my responses:
Tom Jigme Wheat wrote in response to my comment (lines begin with >):
>100 tibetans set themselves on fire to protest chinese communist rule
For as long as the US Congress is spending billions of dollars on
destabilizing Tibet each year using Da Lama and his TGIE cohorts, only
the die-hards will believe that the vulnerable children and young
mothers who went to burn themselves to death while calling for Da Lama
to return and live for ten thousand years are genuinely expressing
unhappiness. It is also such a fallacy that 100 cases of
self-immolation is any fair indication of the preference of six
million Tibetans in China. 100 cases involved 100 Tibetans. Ok, we
can all agree to that. But 100 does not equal 6,000,000! It's not
even close.
In fact, Tibetans don't want repatriation of Dalai Lama, according to
Chinese Vice Minister Cui Yuying - a prominent ethnic Tibetan Chinese
woman.
So I, as well as many others, do believe that the self-immolations are
concocted by the exiles, such as the Free Tibet die-hards and their
allies inside the TGIE and some monks with some monasteries in China,
in collaboration with their financial backers from the West.
As for your other comments, here are my responses:
Tom Jigme Wheat wrote in response to my comment (lines begin with >):
> The fact that the communists successfully took over China, with
> little fighting, shows that they won by the force of logic - not by
> force of luck.
>
> So, of course, the Nationalists could afford only a token presence
> in Tibet despite their assertion of sovereignty over it.
> little fighting, shows that they won by the force of logic - not by
> force of luck.
>
> So, of course, the Nationalists could afford only a token presence
> in Tibet despite their assertion of sovereignty over it.
> But there is no objective reason as to why the corrupt monk system
> should not be replaced by an egalitarian one - which the communists
> brought in and eventually imposed.
> should not be replaced by an egalitarian one - which the communists
> brought in and eventually imposed.
The Tibetan masses have known that for a long time. And that's why
Cui Yuying, the prominent Tibetan political leader in China today,
recently said that most Chinese Tibetans do not want Da Lama to return
to Tibet because his political agenda is at variance with that of the
majority of the Tibetan people. Now that is a powerful testimonial
against the desperate assertion that Tibet was an egalitarian society
in feudal Tibet because Da Lama came from a peasant family.
-----
Tom Jigme Wheat responded to my previous post:
> China was able to go in because the lamas system had rotted to the
> core.
> core.
No Independent Tibet got in the way of the Imperialist designs of
the CCP. That's why they describe the old system as so corrupt. If
it was really better in Tibet under Communist rule Tibetans would'nt
be setting themselves on fire, and we would have a Tibetan Governor.
For as long as there is a massive effort to destabilize Tibet from
outside with a lot of US taxpayer money, protests and even
self-immolations are the result.
And Tibet does have a Tibetan as governor.
This has always been the case.
According to the Wikipedia, the Tibet Autonomous Region is a
province-level entity of the People's Republic of China. It is
governed by a People's Government, led by a Chairman. The current
Chairman is Losang Jamcan.
--------
Tom Jigme Wehat responded to my previous post:
the CCP. That's why they describe the old system as so corrupt. If
it was really better in Tibet under Communist rule Tibetans would'nt
be setting themselves on fire, and we would have a Tibetan Governor.
For as long as there is a massive effort to destabilize Tibet from
outside with a lot of US taxpayer money, protests and even
self-immolations are the result.
And Tibet does have a Tibetan as governor.
This has always been the case.
According to the Wikipedia, the Tibet Autonomous Region is a
province-level entity of the People's Republic of China. It is
governed by a People's Government, led by a Chairman. The current
Chairman is Losang Jamcan.
--------
Tom Jigme Wehat responded to my previous post:
> If Tibet were a reasonable "country" and if it were a matter of brute
> force on the Chinese communists' part, they would have been kicked out
> like Nazi Germany was kicked out from the Soviet Union after some 26
> million Soviet lives had been lost resisting or fighting the Nazi
> invaders.
> force on the Chinese communists' part, they would have been kicked out
> like Nazi Germany was kicked out from the Soviet Union after some 26
> million Soviet lives had been lost resisting or fighting the Nazi
> invaders.
There was 6 million Tibetans in Tibet and 400 million chinese. You can
easily do the math. The PLA overwhelmed them with numbers.
The point is: to the Tibetans, regardless of numbers, the Chinese did
nothing of the sort the Nazi Germany did to the Soviet Union. The
Soviet Union was also a much more populous country than Germany. But
Germany was the invader and slaughtered the Soviets but China has not
been an invader of Tibet and it did not slaughter the Tibetans in
any way remotely like Germany slaughtered the Soviet citizens.
Finally, Germany and the USSR were distinct countries but Tibet has
always been only a province of China - nothing more. Nothing more
because the lamas were too corrupt to assert their manhood.
-----
Tom Jigme Wehat responded to my previous post:
easily do the math. The PLA overwhelmed them with numbers.
The point is: to the Tibetans, regardless of numbers, the Chinese did
nothing of the sort the Nazi Germany did to the Soviet Union. The
Soviet Union was also a much more populous country than Germany. But
Germany was the invader and slaughtered the Soviets but China has not
been an invader of Tibet and it did not slaughter the Tibetans in
any way remotely like Germany slaughtered the Soviet citizens.
Finally, Germany and the USSR were distinct countries but Tibet has
always been only a province of China - nothing more. Nothing more
because the lamas were too corrupt to assert their manhood.
-----
Tom Jigme Wehat responded to my previous post:
> And if China were using overwhelming force like the U.S. has been
> using in Afghanistan and Iraq to gain control of the countries, then
> China would still be spending billions, if not tens of billions, per
> month fighting an insurgency or hiring military contractors to do it
> just as the US has.
> using in Afghanistan and Iraq to gain control of the countries, then
> China would still be spending billions, if not tens of billions, per
> month fighting an insurgency or hiring military contractors to do it
> just as the US has.
>> Tibet despite their assertion of sovereignty over it. ��But the
>> decadence of the lamas shows through because they thought they had
>> nothing to worry about when the world was actually passing them by.
>>
>> decadence of the lamas shows through because they thought they had
>> nothing to worry about when the world was actually passing them by.
>>
Replacement of some broken paragraphs I hastily presented last time:
[China's current position in Tibet did not arise from a vacuum. It
is particularly not a result of some evil doing on China's part,
despite western rhetoric. China was able to go in because the lamas
system had rotted to the core. If Tibet were a reasonable "country"
and if it were a matter of brute force on the Chinese communists'
part, they would have been kicked out like Nazi Germany was kicked
out from the Soviet Union, even after some 26 million Soviet lives
despite western rhetoric. China was able to go in because the lamas
system had rotted to the core. If Tibet were a reasonable "country"
and if it were a matter of brute force on the Chinese communists'
part, they would have been kicked out like Nazi Germany was kicked
had been lost resisting or fighting the Nazi invaders.
(The 26 million figure is taken from a Wikipedia article on losses
by countries during WWII.)
And if China were using overwhelming force like the U.S. has been
using in Afghanistan and Iraq to gain control of the countries, then
China would still be spending billions, if not tens of billions, per
month fighting an insurgency or hiring military contractors to do it
just as the US has.
And had China been compelled to fight an insurgency war anywhere in
the world since 1950, she would have been surely and totally broke!
China has clearly neither the Nazi Germany or the US/NATO problems.
Thus, it is hard to see that Tibet is ever under Chinese occupation.
And there are of course strong reasons for the difference.
First, Tibet had a rotten system that had to be replaced and
millions who needed to be liberated from the lamas and the
landowners. And have had a glimpse into that unspeakably dark past
And if China were using overwhelming force like the U.S. has been
using in Afghanistan and Iraq to gain control of the countries, then
China would still be spending billions, if not tens of billions, per
month fighting an insurgency or hiring military contractors to do it
just as the US has.
And had China been compelled to fight an insurgency war anywhere in
the world since 1950, she would have been surely and totally broke!
China has clearly neither the Nazi Germany or the US/NATO problems.
Thus, it is hard to see that Tibet is ever under Chinese occupation.
And there are of course strong reasons for the difference.
First, Tibet had a rotten system that had to be replaced and
millions who needed to be liberated from the lamas and the
of that region when the non-producing lamas ran amok in Heinrich
Harrer's Seven Years of Tibet. And many Tibetans today can attest
to the social progress made in the region. In fact, Harrer gave
examples of the cruelty he had personally witnessed, including cases
in which he thought were more inhumane than the death penalty.
to the social progress made in the region. In fact, Harrer gave
examples of the cruelty he had personally witnessed, including cases
in which he thought were more inhumane than the death penalty.
some 26 million Soviet lives had been lost resisting or fighting the
Nazi invaders.
(The 26 million figure is taken from a Wikipedia article on losses by
Nazi invaders.
Atiya Achakulwisut , BangKok , Thai 's land
Feb 28, 2014, 2:43:39 AM2/28/14
to
He was right.
"lo yeeOn" wrote in message news:kml6ta$5g7$1...@reader1.panix.com...
"lo yeeOn" wrote in message news:kml6ta$5g7$1...@reader1.panix.com...
join - in to f#@
Apr 1, 2014, 5:14:59 PM4/1/14
to
Is now and then is the same?
"lo yeeOn" wrote in message news:kn4245$9u9$1...@reader1.panix.com...
In article
<5db27a86-72b3-465d...@a10g2000pbr.googlegroups.com>,
The Progressive Voice <thomasw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On May 11, 6:45仩pm, acous...@panix.com (lo yeeOn) wrote:
>> In article <518c31f3.605891...@news.giganews.com>, 仩<hab...@anony.net>
>> Tibet despite their assertion of sovereignty over it. 仩But the
>the world鈥檚 territory has now been turned into a
>picture and what sort of caption would he give it?鈥?These
>illegal鈥攃learly shows what kind of status our people
>equally in our nomadic grasslands? Why can鈥檛 camera-holding
>鈥楾aking pictures, peeing and spitting are strictly prohibited
>here!鈥?
>
>http://www.tchrd.org/2013/05/they-treat-us-like-animals/
"lo yeeOn" wrote in message news:kn4245$9u9$1...@reader1.panix.com...
In article
<5db27a86-72b3-465d...@a10g2000pbr.googlegroups.com>,
The Progressive Voice <thomasw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> In article <518c31f3.605891...@news.giganews.com>, 仩<hab...@anony.net>
>bunch of soul-less slaves serving other people. My dear
>fellow-countrymen, if we cannot paint the bones of our ancestors in
>gold, the least we could do is not to throw their gray hair in the wind.
>
>Tourists visiting from surrounding areas carry cameras of different
>sizes in their hands. Crowds of monks, elderly folks and
>鈥榮ervicemen鈥?bearing horses gape at the tourists when the latter
>fellow-countrymen, if we cannot paint the bones of our ancestors in
>gold, the least we could do is not to throw their gray hair in the wind.
>
>Tourists visiting from surrounding areas carry cameras of different
>sizes in their hands. Crowds of monks, elderly folks and
>take pictures of nomadic villages and rivers. One of the
>tourists pointed his camera at the strange-looking eyes of these
>Tibetans and took their pictures. When I saw this, I wondered:
>鈥榃hen the tourist returns to his place, where would he advertize this
>tourists pointed his camera at the strange-looking eyes of these
>Tibetans and took their pictures. When I saw this, I wondered:
>picture and what sort of caption would he give it?鈥?These
>thoughts gave me intense pain and despair.
>
>Why do these tourists point their cameras on the faces of elderly
>Tibetans and take their pictures? Do these tourists not have a
>sense of ethics and morality? If we turn around and point the camera on
>their faces and take their pictures, wouldn鈥檛 they run
>
>Why do these tourists point their cameras on the faces of elderly
>Tibetans and take their pictures? Do these tourists not have a
>sense of ethics and morality? If we turn around and point the camera on
>away from us saying we are violating their rights? The fact that they
>keep taking pictures of our people, our mountains and our
>villages鈥攄espite knowing that such actions are unethical, immoral and
>keep taking pictures of our people, our mountains and our
>illegal鈥攃learly shows what kind of status our people
>enjoy. They treat us like animals lacking the ability of speech. They
>treat us as wage laborers who could be swayed in any
>direction by the lure of hard cash. They treat us as a race of ignorant
>barbarians. My dear fellow countrymen, as the saying
>goes, if sons fail to inherit the legacy of forefathers or if the
>thread fails to inherit the legacy of needles, others would keep
>trampling on our heads.
>
>What would happen if you visit a Chinese city and randomly point your
>camera on the face of a Chinese and take his picture?
>What consequences would you have to bear if you selfishly take pictures
>of homes, belongings and other precious objects of a
>city? How would the whip of laws chase you away if you trample upon the
>rights and liberties of people living in a city? Why
>can鈥檛 the standards of law and ethics of the cities be applied
>treat us as wage laborers who could be swayed in any
>direction by the lure of hard cash. They treat us as a race of ignorant
>barbarians. My dear fellow countrymen, as the saying
>goes, if sons fail to inherit the legacy of forefathers or if the
>thread fails to inherit the legacy of needles, others would keep
>trampling on our heads.
>
>What would happen if you visit a Chinese city and randomly point your
>camera on the face of a Chinese and take his picture?
>What consequences would you have to bear if you selfishly take pictures
>of homes, belongings and other precious objects of a
>city? How would the whip of laws chase you away if you trample upon the
>rights and liberties of people living in a city? Why
>equally in our nomadic grasslands? Why can鈥檛 camera-holding
>tourists riding in cars and masses on horses enjoy equal status if
>human rights have a universal resonance? Like in the cities,
>why can鈥檛 we put up signboards in nomadic grasslands declaring,
>human rights have a universal resonance? Like in the cities,
>鈥楾aking pictures, peeing and spitting are strictly prohibited
>here!鈥?
>
>http://www.tchrd.org/2013/05/they-treat-us-like-animals/
0 new messages