On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 06:40:41 -0700, fyfpoon@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> On Mar 27, 6:47 pm, netvegetable <flav...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 23:16:26 -0700, fyfp...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>> > On 3月27日, 上午8时41分, netvegetable <flav...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
>> >> On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 18:05:30 -0700, fyfp...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>> >> >> Tibetans would be satisfied with more autonomy and self control.
>> >> >> If they want their own state, why should China resist that?
>>
>> >> >> If that is what Tibetans want, what is China afraid of?
>>
>> >> > Define 'Tibetans' and then the 'people of Tibet'. Do Tibetans or
>> >> > the people of Tibet own
>> >> > Tibet? What is the central government afraid of is not the
>> >> > issue... but perhaps the issue
>> >> > from your sentimental point of view.
>>
>> >> > The people in the streets also want to get a few dimes for coffee
>> >> > from the Royal Bank of Canada too. What is the Bank of Canada
>> >> > afraid of? Well, if that is what they 'want'.
>>
>> >> That would involve the "Royal Bank of Canada". What do you lose if
>> >> Tibet has self=determination?
>>
>> > Then what do you lose when Tibet is not allowed 'self-determination'?
>>
Nothing. Now will you finally answer my question? The Royal Bank of
Canada loses money by buying people free coffee. What do u lose by if
Tibet has self-determination?
--
A: Top posters
Q: What's the most annoying thing on usenet
"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are
conservatives." - John Stuart Mill
|
