Re: Is a 'Free Tibet' a possibility?

On May 12, 3:55=A0pm, netvegetable <n...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On Sun, 11 May 2008 23:33:32 -0700, Yu wrote:
> >> >http://en.chinaelections.org/newsinfo.asp?newsid=3D17363
>
> >> So that's the real reason the People Republic of China opposes
Tibetan
> >> self-determination? =A0i.e, There is no such thing as China, just a
bun=
ch
> >> of Chinas, under a Han Chinese Empire?
>
> > UN charter on self-determination did not apply to secession movements.
> > Neither does it apply to any particular ethnic group.
>
> > The consensus defined a "people" entitled to self-determination as
> > persons living in a particular geographic area, rather than persons
> > sharing a common culture or language.
>
> > Don't abuse terms that you half understood.
>
> Nevertheless, that is true then? That the real reason the People
Republic
> of China opposes Tibetan self-determination is that there is no such
> thing as China? Just a bunch of Chinas, under a Han Chinese Empire?
>
By your standards or by international laws...or by the barrel of a
gun?  Don't simply throw something into the air and treat it done.



> --
> 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- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -