Re: Is a 'Free Tibet' a possibility?

On Mon, 12 May 2008 19:46:20 +0800, fyfpoon@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote
(in article 
<7e6da0df-0d8a-41be-9416-f9f03102cc79@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>):

> On May 12, 4:34 pm, 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.  In 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.

> 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.

Well, I am certain that an election would show that they WANT to take the 
money. I am also certain that their votes would not mean that they could
do 
so. 

Since we were talking about the lack of human rights in China, your
comment 
seems like a non-sequitur, eh?


-- 
Love, Jim
(I often delete parts of the previous post and I often remove excessive 
crossposts.)


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet
News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com
The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+
Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption
=----