On Apr 26, 1:40=A0pm, "Don H" <donlhumphr...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> "Raymond" <ni...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
> news:bbi514hkpfgdfen4g0dv983crndi6o5gdh@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sat, 26 Apr 2008 15:20:53 +1000, fasgnadh <fasgn...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > wrote:
>
> > >Don H wrote:
> > >> Latest news is - China has agreed to resume talks with the Dalai
Lama=
,
> and,
> > >> as both sides agree to autonomy, rather than independence, it seems
w=
e
> may
> > >> have a deal.
>
> > >So much for those who believe that violence against Olympic
> > >torch-bearers is as effective as the Dalai Lama's intelligent
> > >negotiations, which included explicit sup****t for the Beijing
> > >Olympics!
>
> > >Well done the rational moderates!
>
> > >Sucks Boo to the violent fringe nutters! =A0B^D
>
> > >The Dalai Lama and I are well pleased with the outcome,
>
> > Don't give me the bull****. the western anti-China campaign backfired
> > big time that almost ignited a world wide Chinese nationalism
> > firestorm. You stupid west decided to back down. That's why China
> > agreed to talk. Because of this Free Tibet fiasco, the west has lost
> > the hearts of an entire generation of Chinese youths world wide. The
> > Chinese leaders are surprised to find out that the entire nation is
> > united in sup****t of the government. Such sweet victory is something
> > the Chinese government has never tasted since the Korean war.
>
> > You and your Devil Lama are losers!
>
> # =A0I hear the Dalai Lama has just returned from a visit to the USA.
=A0I=
s
> there any significance in that?
> =A0 =A0And what kind of society would Tibet become if returned to rule
und=
er the
> Dalai Lama - a feudal state with lots of useless parasitic monks; back
to
> medieval times?
> =A0 =A0Cries for "freedom" are all very well, but details are needed as
to=
what
> the alternative to current rule would be.
> =A0 =A0Certainly, Tibetans may need some autonomy and don't want an
influx=
of
> Han Chinese settling there and taking over.
> =A0 =A0But, apart from that, how bad are things in Tibet?
> =A0 =A0The US Administration would welcome collapse of one-party rule by
t=
he
> Commies in China, even if nowadays the regime is more nationalistic than
> Communistic.
> =A0 =A0As to USA itself, it is hardly exemplary, where rich get richer,
an=
d
> poor, poorer - otherwise why the cry for "change" in Democratic
primaries.=
> =A0 =A0One-party oligarchy in China, a nation of one billion people, may
n=
ot be
> the most desirable, but the USA is essentially a nation of one-party
rule,=
> the Tweedledumbo and Tweedledonkee of virtually one-party with two
heads,
> where Plutocracy prevails.
> =A0 So, let's get on with Olympic Games, and cut the bull****.
Don H, you have spoken the truth. Let's get on with the Olympics.
|
