On Mar 16, 8:00=A0pm, "ltl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
" <ltl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On Mar 16, 9:18 pm, "truth" <tr...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > For every links u put up I can easily post an opposing
> > links.
> > The Dalai Lama is a man of great Wisdom and Vision.
> > China must engage him to solve this Tibetan problem.
> > Otherwise the Chinese will have to pay an increasing
> > price in the future.
>
> It is not about my links.
It's more about your dishonesty.
> However, I don't know him personally. I can only judge him
> through what he did and what said according to the news
> media. I provided the links such that discussions can be
> based on objective facts.
Bull****. You are one of the least objective posters in Usenet.
> I did not form my opinion based on one instance.
I formed my opinion about you by watching you try to fool people all
the time. And your opinion about the DL is worth less than a pimple on
his finger.
> I had
> learnt about what he did 49 years ago. And more recently,
> his performance during the "Qinghai Anti-poverty project"
> controversy.
>
> How about today? The NYTimes article begins with
>
> "The Dalai Lama on Sunday described feeling "helpless" in
> preventing what he feared could be a bloody clash between
> his followers and Chinese authorities."
>
> More or less the same response during the Qinghai Anti-
> project controversy and 49 years ago.
>
> As the leader of a people, his first duty is not to be helpless.
The DL actually knows himself and can accurately apprise a situation.
You are nothing but a CCP stooge, twisting facts and logic any way you
can to try to pretend that the sky is yellow and the sun is blue.
You're not fooling anyone.
> All other people can be helpless, he cannot. Politics, after all,
> is the arts of the possible.
>
> Agree that China has to deal with the Tibetan leaders. But
> is the DL the right choice. If you think he is a great political
> leader, please share your thought and reasoning.
Why should anyone try to have a rational discussion with you? You have
shown time and time again that your agenda maskes you incapable of
talking straight. You are a bull****er of the highest order.
>
> > Both the pro-Tibetans and pro-Chinese are wrong.
> > Both of these camps can go to hell. They will not help
> > to solve the Tibetan problem for the benefits of all
> > concern.
>
> > <ltl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
>
>news:2e6b73ed-8164-4b6e-97ab-5743b9201174@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > On Mar 16, 8:52 am, "truth" <tr...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > > It is obvious now that China brought the current Tibet problems
> > > upon itself by not engaging the Dalai Lama.
> > > The Dalai Lama is a peaceful loving and reasonable person.
> > > Had China engaged the Dalai Lama instead of ostracising him,
> > > the situation in Tibet would not have developed into its' current
> > > state.
> > > The Tibetans are wrong to attack, injured and killed the ordinary
> > > Chinese people for their greviences with the Central government.
> > > The Chinese Authorities must now act with restrains to stop the
> > > violences. The culprits should be fairly dealth with. If they need
to
> > > be punished, then punish them. Chinese Authorities must adopt
> > > a sort of big brotherly mentality like the way they deal with the
> > > Muslim minorities in Hainan Island. They must now engaged with
> > > the Dalai Lama to find a solution to the question of Tibet without
> > > endangering China's control over the territory. Give the Tibetan
> > > autonomy in certain areas like religion, cultural and traditional
> > > practices. These Tibetans must also be help economically. Only
> > > in this way can China win over the hearts and minds of the Tibetan
> > > people. The Dalai Lama has admitted that it is in Tibetans'
interests
> > > to remain a part of China.
>
> > The tragic thing is that the DL is not much of a political leader.
> > His wisdom of governing is remained at the stage of how a
> > parrot handler should treat a pet parrot.
>
> >http://www.time.com/time/asia/magazine/2000/0717/tibet_sb1.html
>
> > --------------------------------
>
> > TIME: Can the Tibetans ever be loyal to a Chinese regime?
> > "...When I was young, I had a beautiful parrot. One attendant always
> > fed that parrot and so it was absolutely loyal to him. I got a little
> > bit jealous. On a few occasions, I fed it. But it never showed me any
> > loyalty. Then I used a stick. And then the loyalty was absolutely
> > gone."
>
> > --------------------------------
>
> > Simply put, governance menas responsiblity. It is far more than
> > bribing the people for their loyalty.
>
> > If the PRC simply wanted loyalty, the first thing was not to treat
> > them as citizens, but colonial subjects. China simply had to build
> > more
> > monasteries, to acknowledge and sup****t more God-kings. The
> > oversupply
> > of God-kings from different sects, new and old, will then compete for
> > good will and subsidies from Beijing. Living standard would remain
> > low
> > in Tibet. Birth rate would drop with more Tibetans devoted to
> > Buddhism.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
|
