Re: Is a 'Free Tibet' a possibility?

On May 12, 4:34=A0pm, Jim Walsh <jimNOwalsSPA...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On Mon, 12 May 2008 09:51:06 +0800, Peter Webb wrote
> (in article <4827a29b$0$13948$afc38...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>):
>
>
>
> > Now they are free not to be owned. =A0In terms of other kinds of
freedom=
, they
> > don't suffer any more than any other groups in China.
>
> Agree that Tibetans are unfree, like the Chinese in general.
>
> --
> Love, Jim
> (I often delete parts of the previous post and I often remove excessive
> crossposts.)
>
> ----=3D=3D Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure
Usenet=
 News=3D=3D----http://www.newsfeeds.comThe
#1 Newsgroup Service in the
World=
! 120,000+ Newsgroups
> ----=3D East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption
=
=3D----

All the down and outs in the city of Vancouver want to take money from
the Royal Bank of Canada.  If you don't believe, let them have a
election and decide.