Why no intenational outcry on destroying living Buddhist culture?
ltl...@hotmail.com
<jimNO...@tranSPAMsend.com.tw> writes:
>On 11 Mar 2001 16:09:46 GMT, ltl...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>>In article <9ohlatcfu6bkj3o54...@4ax.com>, Jim Walsh
>><jimNO...@tranSPAMsend.com.tw> writes:
>>>On 10 Mar 2001 23:03:07 GMT, ltl...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> If one truly cares about Buddhist statues, should he not
>>>>concern about the fate of Buddhists too?
>>>
>>>I don't care a bit about "Buddhist" statues or about the fate of
>>>"Buddhists". I care about archaeologically important works of art and
>>>people. That is why I oppose the destruction of these statues, but
>>>devote more energy to opposing the Taliban's abuse of Afghanistan's
>>>women.
Your statement and the context of your statement are presented above. Readers
can judge what you mean.
The proclamation/statement/confession of a self-proclaimed American human
rights activitist:
I don't care a bit about "Buddhist" statues or about the fate of
"Buddhists". --- Jim Walsh.
====================================
My English is not perfect.
But I will ask what make Buddhists less human in the eye of human rights
activitists.
Why no intenational outcry on destroying living Buddhist culture?
----- Posted via NewsOne.Net: Free (anonymous) Usenet News via the Web -----
http://newsone.net/ -- Free reading and anonymous posting to 60,000+ groups
NewsOne.Net prohibits users from posting spam. If this or other posts
made through NewsOne.Net violate posting guidelines, email ab...@newsone.net
Brian Jackson
>>> Jim Walsh <jimNO...@tranSPAMsend.com.tw> writes:
>>>>On 10 Mar 2001 23:03:07 GMT, ltl...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>>> If one truly cares about Buddhist statues, should he not
>>>>>concern about the fate of Buddhists too?
>>>>I don't care a bit about "Buddhist" statues or about the fate of
>>>>"Buddhists". I care about archaeologically important works of art and
>>>>people. That is why I oppose the destruction of these statues, but
>>>>devote more energy to opposing the Taliban's abuse of Afghanistan's
>>>>women.
>Your statement and the context of your statement are presented above. Readers
>can judge what you mean.
>The proclamation/statement/confession of a self-proclaimed American human
>rights activitist:
>I don't care a bit about "Buddhist" statues or about the fate of
>"Buddhists". --- Jim Walsh.
Seems like you are trying to twist his meaning. I read his paragraph
(not just the sentence you extract) as saying he doesn't care about
the "Buddhist-ness" of statues or people, as the significance of the
monuments and value of peoples' rights do not depend on what their
religion is. I'm sure Jim can straighten you out on this himself.
>My English is not perfect.
>But I will ask what make Buddhists less human in the eye of human rights
>activitists.
Don't be daft! Show me a human rights activist who claims Buddhists
are less human. Jim is actually saying (as if you *need* this
explained, which I can't believe), that *people* have rights which are
not determined by their religion, nationality or any other superficial
characteristic. Buddhists are a subset of human beings, some of whose
rights are respected and some whose rights are not. In the context of
Afghanistan, there are no Buddhists there anymore - the issue is human
rights for people, and especially the women.
>Why no intenational outcry on destroying living Buddhist culture?
This is a laugh coming from you. Normally any such outcry will be
categorised by yourself into something like the following:
ltlee Feb 11, 2001 -
It seems to see that many holier-than-thou organization, a.k.a
human rights and tibitism groups' only activity is to pressure
other people (Chinese citizens) and/or other nations (the PRC)
to do what these organization wish.
There are many Buddhist *cultures* (note the plural) in Asia, but only
one I can think of which is facing destruction. Different Buddhist
cultures endure in Burma, Laos, Thailand, Cambodia, Indonesia,
Vietnam, India, Sri Lanka, China and Tibet. Only in Tibet is it under
attack by a government with "Strike Hard", "Promote Atheism" etc.
campaigns. Where is your concern for this "living Buddhist culture"
when any international outcry is termed by you as anti-China activity,
selfishly motivated, and so on?
When the China Democracy Party makes any policy statement on human
rights for Tibetans (a domestic rather than international outcry),
they become your enemies as well:
ltlee Jan 21, 2001 -
Supporting CDP, at this junction, is more like supporting the
Aryan Nations in the USA. Most of the followers of these
extremist gorups are devoted Christians.
In fact your concern for "why no international outcry" is just
crocodile tears, considering the little importance you place on basic
human rights:
ltlee Jan 11, 2001 -
I think non-security related human rights items are not human
needs. They are of secondary importance.
Taliban have destroyed some ancient Buddhist monuments, many people
consider that a loss for the world. A mulla said it won't take long,
"It's easier to destroy than to build."
Chinese communist government is attempting to destroy an ancient
Buddhist culture, and many people consider that a more significant
loss for the world. The CCP, who you always say represents the will of
the people, might as well use the mulla's motto for their project.
Brian
--
Sign seen in southern Tibet (in Chinese, Tibetan and English):
"POLICE ATTENTION: NO DISTRIBUTING ANY UNHEALTHY THOUGHTS OR OBJECTS."
(Spotter: John Hill.)
Phil
Keep laughing - ltlee is really out of the loop:
a) there is no living Buddhist culture in Afghanistan
b) there has been a great outcry against the destruction of Buddhist
artifacts by the Taliban. Even the Taliban's close ally, Pakistan,
protested... ltlee won't hear of an outcry if he doesn't monitor the
news in, e.g., the BBC World Service.
Brian Jackson
>Brian Jackson wrote:
>> ltl...@hotmail.com wrote:
>> >Why no intenational outcry on destroying living Buddhist culture?
>> This is a laugh coming from you.
>Keep laughing - ltlee is really out of the loop:
>a) there is no living Buddhist culture in Afghanistan
>b) there has been a great outcry against the destruction of Buddhist
>artifacts by the Taliban. Even the Taliban's close ally, Pakistan,
>protested... ltlee won't hear of an outcry if he doesn't monitor the
>news in, e.g., the BBC World Service.
Hi again Phil,
I suspect he must know this. I think even Peoples Daily must have
carried the protest from "Chinese Buddhists" - i.e. the government
sanctioned association in Beijing. But if he was trying to point out
hypocrisy of protesting destruction of ancient relics with ambivalence
toward destruction of living Buddhist culture, I'm afraid he is still
on shaky ground. If we'd had internet and 24 hour news back in 1950
when the PLA invaded Tibet, or during the 60's when thousands of
temples and monasteries were reduced to rubble, it would have been
rather more difficult to keep it from the world's attention.
Brian
--
Don't bother questioning authority -- they don't know, either.
Francis POON
Brian Jackson <bri...@inet.co.th> wrote in message
news:/FPt6Yhtj...@inet.co.th...
The destruction of the temples and places of worship was done out of
ideological reasons in China while what has just happened in Afgan was done
out of rage that the money sent by Europeans did not go to save the starving
children. Both actually embodies an 'principle' element. However, I would
like to point out that currently what is fostering the temples in China is
their economic value rather than anything else. Thus to promote tourist
business in Tibet is the best way to have those temples restored. Hundreads
of temples in Tibet can be turned into various business entities selling
tourist goods and food. The competition among them can keep the prices low
and the money obtained therefrom can be used for the upkeep of those
temples.
FP>