It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A picture show you Lama's violence in Tibet riot

page: 6
3
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 05:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Edn


If that were the case then Iraq would never have been invaded and Saddam would still be in power.


If you like to I can soften this statement.

Once a CIA man, always a CIA man, no matter from what channels you are getting the CIA sponsorships, as long as you are still useful and keep on playing their puppet.




The CIA and USA in general only support people when it suits there needs, when the CIA put there noses in when China first invaded Tibet it wasn't for a Free Tibet is was for a non-Chinese Tibet, the more power the Chinese have the more dangerous you are perceived by the US Government.

The Dalai Lama is of no use the the USA(edit: by that i mean in physical action) . Never was and never will be, except maybe in a war of words.


What the USA consider useful or not is up to the US elites to make up, not to th common people anyhow. Either you call it CIA, NED, or what other exotic three letters one is giving to his organization, eventually if you are useful to certain people then they will find their ways to use you. Now by no means I want to start a American bashing tour, the above provided article is only to showcase you that the Dalai Lama and his movements are being sponsored by certain outsiders. Outsiders who are known for having their own agenda than for the benefits of their money-receivers. Who most likely have different motives than what these so-called peaceful monks think, and one can only be very skeptical how policies are formed in the exiled government. Is it really that the Chinese push too hard or is it because some power influences tell the younger hardliners that the Dalai Lama's middle non-violent way is outdated? And many more other questions can be raised

Well if you refuse to look at the big picture of the why, then feel free to keep on being sick.



[edit on 31/3/08 by IchiNiSan]




posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 09:18 PM
link   
reply to post by IchiNiSan
 


IchinNiSan I could care less who is supporting the fight for a free Tibet just as long as they and the Dalai Lama are recieving support. The well being of Tibetans and the Dalai Lama is all that matters. I think China needs to return the Panchen Lama and his family...kidnapping..really. China will resort to any ugly deed.




posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 10:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Witness2008
 


It's not a matter if you or other pro-DL clique care about it or not, because the Tibet issue seems to be a much bigger complex complicated Geo-Political issue between competiting countries in the world theater. Governments and power hungry people who could care less about the human rights or well beings of Tibetans or any other ethnic race. Organizations whose agenda is eventually to weakening their enemies with whatever means they possess, even using so-called peaceful movement, as long as they reach their goals.

And to say it even more boldly, no boycott or other activist actions will "free" Tibet, only a World War will do the trick. This is the reality. Either we like it or not, it would not care at all, what care is how we are dealing with this problem . This can only be done by looking forward, and see what is the best for everyone's interests. Even the Dalai Lama sees it, that's why he claims that he is only wanting greater autonomy. Well Wen Jiabao already said it explictly again in Laos this weekend, if the Dalai Lama can control his followers and is willing to talk, he is open to talk with him anytime. So why the Dalai Lama is not accepting Wen's invitation to minimize the violences now?

[warning: conspiracy mode on]

Maybe the Dalai Lama doesn't control his movement anymore? Maybe the movement is influenced and controlled by outsiders, who does not want to look forward, but create chaos?

[/mode off]






[edit on 1/4/08 by IchiNiSan]


Edn

posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 11:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by IchiNiSan
reply to post by Witness2008
 


It's not a matter if you or other pro-DL clique care about it or not,

Check your definition of clique


Originally posted by IchiNiSan
reply to post by Witness2008
 

And to say it even more boldly, no boycott or other activist actions will "free" Tibet, only a World War will do the trick.
That's sad to hear, I just hope (assuming your not employed by the Chinese government
) that this isn't the view of the Chinese government.


Originally posted by IchiNiSan
reply to post by Witness2008
 
Well Wen Jiabao already said it explictly again in Laos this weekend, if the Dalai Lama can control his followers and is willing to talk, he is open to talk with him anytime. So why the Dalai Lama is not accepting Wen's invitation to minimize the violences now?
The Dalai Lama has always been open for talks, I remember him saying this many times, im not sure how many (or if) invitations he has sent to China but China has rarely wanted to talk with the Dalai Lama.


Originally posted by IchiNiSan
reply to post by Witness2008
 



Maybe the Dalai Lama doesn't control his movement anymore? Maybe the movement is influenced and controlled by outsiders, who does not want to look forward, but create chaos?



You don't control angry citizens, Just because Tibetans thrash back at the Chinese in there country does not mean they are part of his 'movement'.

Its not like there's a membership to this movement you talk about, you either support a Tibet free of Chinese control of your don't. I support a free Tibet, that does not mean the Dalai Lama can tell me what I can and can not do.

Sorry if this is a little harsh but you seam to be a little lost from reality or maybe uneducated? A government does not control its people (well, not all its people.). The people are supposed to control the government, obviously this doesn't always happen in practice. The Dalai Lama may be the Leader of Tibet but that by no means makes all Tibetans follow his every word. the Dalai Lama can (and has) only ask Tibetans to stop the violence but in the end its up to the person being violent.

Maybe you should understand that. The Dalai Lama doesn't control anyone, he never has, he may point in the direction he wants Tibetans to go but if they don't want to they wont. that's the difference between Tibet and China, you don't need to follow your leader in Tibet if you don't agree with what he says, in China you do or you will be forced to do, unless your extremely lucky.



posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 11:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Witness2008
I think China needs to return the Panchen Lama and his family...kidnapping..really.


The so called "Panchen Lama" was chosen by another fraction of Tibetans from the current one in power. He is under a witness protection program living a normal life a boy would live, instead of being kidnapped by the Dalai Clique and being brainwashed to believe he was a reincarnation of a Lama.


There is no tradtion in this, the Dalai Lama's and Panchen Lama's position was created by a Mongolian and the way they were chosen was by a lottery system made by the Chinese emperor



posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 11:41 PM
link   

Sorry if this is a little harsh but you seam to be a little lost from reality or maybe uneducated?


Well, sounding uneducated or not, it's up to you to think
Talking about freedom of expressing someone's opinion, hahahah, so anyone not sharing the same "logic", or "belief" or "what is the best way to run a country" is simply uneducated or not attached to reality
That's a good one, I need to note that down somewhere, you know, otherwise my uneduacted brains will forget that.



Disclaimer: Although I am an honary almuni of the People's Republic of China Intelligence and Public Relation University, I do not represent the official viewpoints of our beloved worshipped great perfect leaders in the Chinese Communist Party and our democratic chosen Central Government. My underpaid job here is to use my best English, which is my 4th language, only to spread propaganda and disinformation, by bringing the facts on table with evidences and proofs of and showing you independent links and sources found on the World Wide Web, which were written by authors who I have hell no clue if they are being paid by the Chinese government or not as long as it sounds a little bit neutral less extremist than the biased pro-Tibet articles, so with these independent links and sources everyone can get a better picture of what is really going on. So in other words, I am not authorized to express the Chinese viewpoints, not untill I get promoted higher up you know. Damn that promotion is promised to me so long ago, I must be lied upon again, those lying [beep]....



[edit on 1/4/08 by IchiNiSan]



posted on Apr, 1 2008 @ 12:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Edn
The Dalai Lama doesn't control anyone, he never has, he may point in the direction he wants Tibetans to go but if they don't want to they wont.




???

The Dalai Lama to the Tibetans is a modern day god, he is their god and his title "his holiness" reflects that belief. His the equivalent of the Pope to the Tibetan people but his opinion is much more valued by Tibetans. Tibetans at home and aboard are heavily influenced by him and your suggestion that his influence is limited is ignorant to the Tibetans thoughts



posted on Apr, 1 2008 @ 12:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Edn
but China has rarely wanted to talk with the Dalai Lama.


And thats because the Tibetans version of negotiation is have this or nothing. The Tibetans claim they just want "autonomy" but if you look at what they want its just independence in another name, thats why China refuses to continue negotiations because they progress nowhere.


And is one thing to say you are open to dialogue like the Tibetans have, its another to exactly proceed with it


Edn

posted on Apr, 1 2008 @ 12:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite

Originally posted by Edn
The Dalai Lama doesn't control anyone, he never has, he may point in the direction he wants Tibetans to go but if they don't want to they wont.




???

The Dalai Lama to the Tibetans is a modern day god, he is their god and his title "his holiness" reflects that belief. His the equivalent of the Pope to the Tibetan people but his opinion is much more valued by Tibetans. Tibetans at home and aboard are heavily influenced by him and your suggestion that his influence is limited is ignorant to the Tibetans thoughts


First The Dalai Lama is not considered a god, anyone to think such a thing would be wrong and im pretty sure the Dalai Lama would correct them on this.

Second His Holiness is simply part of his title as the position that he takes in Tibetan Buddhism, it has no connection to him being any sort of god.

His influence will only influence people if what he is saying holds ground, Buddhism isnt dictatorship, and its been around so long because people question it and agree or disagree with its teaching.

To suggest that Tibetans should do as the Dalai Lama says simply because hes the Dalai Lama spiritual and political leader of Tibet.. well it just shows how much the Chinese governments ways of doing things has affected the way you see things.

Not everyone will agree with the Dalai Lamas position of non-violence to solve Chinas occupation of Tibet, Buddhist or not, Tibetan or not, regardless if the Dalai Lama is the leader of the Tibetan people, just like in the west, just like any country in the world people have there own views on things.


Originally posted by chinawhite
And thats because the Tibetans version of negotiation is have this or nothing. The Tibetans claim they just want "autonomy" but if you look at what they want its just independence in another name, thats why China refuses to continue negotiations because they progress nowhere.


The same can be said for China, I cant comment on any specific negotiations but negotiations are two way, the Chinese have to also let go of what they want.

Autonomy isn't independence and to be honest depending on the specifics autonomy will still give China access to Tibet and its resources, along with access to the borders at Bhutan, India and Nepal.

Its not that different than what Scotland wants/has actually, though technically we are a separate country we are not independent, however we are for the most part self governing.



posted on Apr, 1 2008 @ 01:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Edn
First The Dalai Lama is not considered a god, anyone to think such a thing would be wrong and im pretty sure the Dalai Lama would correct them on this.


The Tibetans consider the Dalai Lama to be a re-incarnation of Chenrezig, the God of compassion. The Dalai Lama might propagate that he is nothing more than a mortal is not shared by the ordinary Tibetans who worship him like a god. Can you provide proof to the contrary? This Dalai Lama might be modest about his position but thats his modesty to this issue. He is a god to the Tibetans



Although he describes himself as a 'simple Buddhist monk', last week's events in the Tibetan plateau have underlined the Dalai Lama's importance as a symbol of peaceful protests and a struggle for cultural freedom. For Tibetans, he is the Ocean of Wisdom, a god-king who engenders intense devotion - his name was chanted repeatedly by protesters across the roof of the world.

www.guardian.co.uk...


The one-time boy king has become the most celebrated man in robes since Mahatma Gandhi, whom he says is his major role model, along with American civil rights advocate Martin Luther King Jr. Yet he insists he never sought the limelight. Others may worship him as a living god, but the Dalai Lama says he's "just a simple monk" with no exceptional wisdom to impart. "Others are always making too much of my words," he says. "People are too serious. All the time, too serious."

www.gluckman.com...




well it just shows how much the Chinese governments ways of doing things has affected the way you see things.


I am not affected by anything the Chinese government says. I dont bother reading news from Xinhua or the PLAdally nor do I read other papers on the other side of the spectrum like the CNN or BBC. I read what I read and then formulate my opinion based on what I have read. If I think it sounds false then I wont agree with it.

Please dont tout the line as if I'm a Chinese Communist or something alone those lines


Not everyone will agree with the Dalai Lamas position of non-violence to solve Chinas occupation of Tibet


Not everyone will agree because people will interrupt different information. If the Dalai Lama told his supporters to not use violence do you honestly believe they will continue with the violence?. Because his considered a God to Tibetans doesn't mean they will heed all his advice, which I never said nor suggested.


Autonomy isn't independence and to be honest depending on the specifics autonomy will still give China access to Tibet and its resources, along with access to the borders at Bhutan, India and Nepal.



Autonomy on that level in Tibet IS independence. I doubt the resources, Tibet in its current state enjoys more autonomy than the the rest of China, they dont even have to pay taxes and get government hand outs

The Tibetans dont just want what we consider current Tibet or the TAR. They want "outer Tibet" as well. Outer Tibet is a place where the majority of Tibetan people live and the place where many battlers of the last 700 years took place. This area forms part of Han Chinese history (silk road) and yet the Tibetans claim it because of the previous conquest (short lived I might add)



posted on Apr, 1 2008 @ 02:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Edn
The same can be said for China, I cant comment on any specific negotiations but negotiations are two way, the Chinese have to also let go of what they want.

Autonomy isn't independence and to be honest depending on the specifics autonomy will still give China access to Tibet and its resources, along with access to the borders at Bhutan, India and Nepal.

Its not that different than what Scotland wants/has actually, though technically we are a separate country we are not independent, however we are for the most part self governing.


Hey, there is one point that I kinda agree with you. A compromise need to be made, we need to find a peaceful solution to the current status quo. And all parties need to add some oil.

Of course the technically terms as "seperate" etc would need to be avoided in a mutual agreement how to live further. The self governing is well in place like in Hong Kong, where we have a one country 2 systems policy. Besides that the PLA replaced the British navy, there is not much difference then back then before 1997 and actually even more democracies than ever.

As for Tibet, let's skip the historical part, how it was the lama elites trying to revolt etc etc etc. Just look forward now. Self-governming is supposedly also already in place in Tibet. But if we can give a greater autonomy, what would be the limits. Something similar as in Hong Kong and Macau? I think to some great extent these are two very good examples what works and what not. But innerland borders needless to say would need to be totally open unlike what we see in Hong Kong and Macau. Compared to them, we save the hassle of "voting" for the "governor", which is the Dalai Lama obviously, and each time he can reincarnate to continue bringing a real sustainable development and growth for the Tibetan autonomous province, which is ruled under the one country two system philosophy.








[edit on 1/4/08 by IchiNiSan]



posted on Apr, 1 2008 @ 03:28 AM
link   
This picture was made at least before 2003 after Monks refused to be part of a movie. PLA soldiers were ordered to put the robes on instead. The original source was buddhism.kalachakranet.org posted on the 20 march and the intention of posting the picture was to say that China did this already and they did it again coinciding with the "supposed" British report. It did not claim this was people who actually took part in the riots. The picture was first seen on the back-cover of the 2003 annual TCHRD Report


Again more false propaganda from these pro-Tibetans











[edit on 1-4-2008 by chinawhite]



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 02:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite
This picture was made at least before 2003 after Monks refused to be part of a movie. PLA soldiers were ordered to put the robes on instead.


I guess the movie was called Real Life under Communist Dictatorship™.

That sounds like another manifestation of the fact that the army is just a tool in the hands of the degenerated communist party.



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 04:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by IchiNiSan
 


I would sleep quite well knowing my tax dollars where being spent flooding arms and munitions into tibet .. I would say its about time we do something worth while.. albeit for alternative motives, just to get back at the Chinese whom I despise.. Sadly though the American government has not been involved and is not funding Tibet.. if America where involved it would join in the boycot of the chinese Olympics. Naturally America makes a massive sum of money off the games, so we will not boycot.

I say boycot the whole damn country. Place them in line with North Korea and cut off all trade.

We can make our own cheaply made plastic crap to waste money on.


Tell this to your governs and transnational corporation who grasped most of the benefit, but not the forum members. I will be very glad to see that. You must have a heavy headache and bad memory. Just 20 years ago, US DID blocked the whole China for their ideological strategy. Finally it failed and proves the world not controlled in one hand of US. So it's free for you to advise govern to try again.

Shame for you to remind that. in the trade between US and China. We collected a lot of worthless papers printed by US federal banks while providing numerical labor-intensive products at a low cost. One day, China will tighten trades of this kind and reduce holdings of US dollars.
Until then you can't realize the contribution of China to US economy.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join