Shanghaiist: Chaos continues in Dharamsala and Lhasa

concor1

Tue, 25 Mar 2008 17:56:28 +0700

all the white americans are invaders, rob the lands of indians then kill them. why there is no indians politican ? they are put in a reserve like a zoo. pathetic. same goes with aussie and kiwi.. at least aussie apologized

concor1

Tue, 25 Mar 2008 17:43:33 +0700

CIA just fancy the return of slavery. therefore paid DL $15000 usdollar every month! why dont cia do that in USA?

bamboos

Sat, 22 Mar 2008 21:44:13 +0700

-- nanheyangrouchuan, If you are in China currently, I feel sorry for you, because everyday of your life is surrounded by this hatred feeling. that must be painful. If you are not in China, I feel sorry for you, because you are taking so much care to catch up China's news, which may have made you miserable. Wish you have a beautiful tomorrow.

nanheyangrouchuan

Fri, 21 Mar 2008 23:35:40 +0700

@ Bamboo; The western governments and media may be cowards but the regular people of the world are speaking up. Korea and Japan are well aware of the hideous, ugly, mass murdering nature of China and its 5000 years of cave man brutality. The internet is filled with disgust at Bad China's attack on Bhuddism and a harmless population.

bamboos

Fri, 21 Mar 2008 21:38:18 +0700

Please allow me to paste an article here which is written by an Chinese living in USA, that website is GFW'ed Intentional Ignorance and Deliberate Wording I feel furious about the criminal riots happened in Tibet and I am even more furious about the reports in the western countries regarding the riots in Tibet. Let me start my points from a true story. A couple of years ago, on a World Conference on Women, many Tibetan women also attended the meeting. These Tibetan women are mainly from the two groups; the woman delegates from the Tibetan autonomous region of China and the woman delegates from an NGO on behalf of the “Free-Tibet” which is financially supported by the major western powers. As usual, the woman delegates from the NGO claimed that the Tibetan culture is being destructed and the only way to rescue the Tibetan culture is to reverse the history to let the Dalai Lama come back to lead an “Independent Great Tibet” or “Highly Autonomous Great Tibetan Area.” The voiced out their claims in English, so that their claims were easily passed and quoted by the reporters of major western countries. When the Tibetan women from the Tibet Autonomous Region of China tried to discuss the Tibetan Cultural Destruction issue with the Tibetan women from the “Free Countries,” and they found there was no way to communicate directly between them because the Tibetan women from the “free countries” do not speak Tibetan while the Tibetan women from Tibet do not speak English. Thus, we saw two groups of Tibetans; though they are common on similar faces and having the similar costume styles, the difference between them is the group of Tibetans from “Free Countries” can speak English only but not Tibetan while the group of Tibetans from Tibet can speak Tibetan but not English. When the two Tibetan groups are arguing on the Tibetan issues, the English spoken Tibetans took advantage of the Tibetan spoken Tibetans since their can voice out directly to the journalists of “free countries” while none of the reporters from the “free countries” speaks Tibetan. Nevertheless, the reporters from the “free countries” never bothered to listen to what the Tibetan-spoken Tibetans’ voices through the interpreters. Then, ironically, on the major media and newspapers of the “free countries” the claim of the “Tibetan culture is being destructed” by the Tibetans who have already forgotten how to speak Tibetan are widely quoted while the voices of Tibetan spoken Tibetans were ignored by the journalists of “free countries.” The ignorance is actually an intentional ignorance. Recently, some Tibetan mobs, actually a number of organized Tibetan terrorist groups indiscriminately killing the civilians in Lhasa as well as in some other Tibetan areas. The victims also include many ethnic Tibetans. A Tibetan young girl was burned dead together with other four girls of other ethnic Chinese when the mobs surrounded their shop and burn them alive. A middle school that many Tibetan children are attended was set on fire by the mobs too. Facing the bloody facts of terrorist activities, the journalists of the “free countries” that had been keen on “Anti Terrorist War” are showing their capricious reacts. When the local police of Lhasa took actions to suppress the criminals, the western media described police action as “suppressing the demonstration” so that in their reports, the criminal mobs become demonstrators and the terrorist activities become peaceful demonstrations; and the civilians killed by the criminals all become the victims of the police suppression. The media of the “free countries deliberately” deliberately refer the mobs as the Tibetans and refer the policemen and civilian victims as Chinese, though many policemen and the local government officials are ethnic Tibetans, and the civilian victims of the riots include Tibetans, Muslims, Hans and many other religious and ethnic Chinese. By their de????ion, the event of the terrorists indiscriminately killing the civilians is deliberately worded as the conflict between ethnic Tibetan and other ethnics of Chinese. Though many local policemen in Tibet are ethnic Tibetan, the majority of the local officials in Tibet who are leading the police suppressions are also ethnic Tibetans; the western media intentionally ignored this fact and deliberately describe them as Chinese officials and Chinese police. Since the Tibetan is an ethnic group of Chinese, describing a Tibetan as a Chinese is the same as describing a New Yorker as an American may be logically correct. However, their purpose to deliberately use the wording is to confuse and mislead their readers as if the event in Tibet were not a terrorist attack by criminals to the civilians but a conflict between the ethnic groups in China, and hint that the ethnic problem is cause by Chinese police suppression. Actually, the criminals involved in this riot are not only ethnic Tibetans, there are also other ethnics of Chinese including Hans funded by the foreign organizations. The civilian victims also include many ethnics, many of them are Tibetans, all of them are so innocent and the badly violation of their human rights by the criminals are ignored by the media of “free countries” who have been chanting human right all the time. Just because this riot is a terrorist attack by the criminals in the name of Dalai Lama and Free Tibet funded and supported by the “free countries.” The media of free countries are taking advantage of ignorance of the most audiences about Tibet so as to spread the biased publicity in favor of the Tibetan terrorists. That is why we can see some western newspapers “mistakenly” use the pictures of clashes between Tibetan demonstrators and Nepal police to describe that the Tibetan demonstrators are beaten by Chinese police, and we can also see many western newspapers “carelessly” ignored the fact that the Tibetan middle school was set on fire and the Tibetan girls were killed, and described the criminals as “demonstrators.” Now we finally understand that the media of the “free countries” are so free that they can freely define any phrase and any event by intentionally ignoring some facts and deliberate use different wordings so as to mislead readers. The truth is always irrelevant for the media of the “free countries.” -- An Overseas Chinese

bamboos

Thu, 20 Mar 2008 21:30:43 +0700

According to the education I got, 'crap' is not a civilized word, unless you specifically mention some specific thing. People have different views. It is OK if you donot agree with or angry at, but it is not necessary to name them as 'crap'. Maybe I got the wrong education, attended wrong school, so, I had better not to argue with you, a well-educated person. Human has a tendency to believe the first information/impression he got. then, he thinks he knows the truth, and then select the facts to favour the *truth* which he believes in. I really feel sorry for all those people who lost their lives in that riot, whatever their ethnic are Han, Hui or Tibetan etc. I salute to some senior Tibetans and one Canadian tourist who protected Han/Hui Chinese during the violence. And, mostly, I hope law and order can be fully resumed in that land asap.

Dragon32

Thu, 20 Mar 2008 16:55:21 +0700

100 Tibetans killed and it is a massacre and a degrading of human rights! 100 Palestinians killed and it is an offensive against terror.

WatchBagDVD

Thu, 20 Mar 2008 07:34:11 +0700

@ bamboos "China and West media have 2 totally different viewpoints. How to talk and communicate with each other?" Actually, if you'll note the muted reaction of Bush and other Western leaders, who limit themselves to mild pleas for "restraint," and the degree to which this moderate and conciliatory posturing toward China is duplicated in much--but not all--of mainstream Western media, I think you'll realize that Chinese and Western media have very similar viewpoints on many issues. Namely, economic ones. The West and China have so much invested in one another that causes that don't result in fast profits for the already-powerful get a bit of lip service and then are ignored. So human rights and environmental protection, for example, are very low on the actual priority list in both the West and China, at least when we look at the global picture (the West, of course, has had the luxury of outsourcing a lot of dirty industry and low-wage human-rights-violating labor to China and other "developing" countries. Anyway, how's Tibet fit into this? Nobody, in China or the West, wants to upset the economic apple cart (which may be too late, but for entirely other reasons than Tibet), so the struggles of Tibetans (or Palestinians or Iraqis etc.) are more problems to be *managed* than to be resolved in ethically and morally directed ways. So my point is: the media in China and the West is full of whores to power on both sides. Absolute shameless whores. But there are big differences--a dissenting voice in the West is far less likely to end up silenced by the state than in China, where the Party seems almost as terrified of its people as its people are terrified of it. But this "2 totally different viewpoints" stuff is total crap. "In China, all media is about Tibet's violent riot; whilst at western media, it is all about Tibetan as victim of Beijing, and this incident provides a good reason to boycott Beijing Olympic." More total generalizing crap. In the West, it is *not* "all about Tibetan as victim of Beijing" etc.--there are a lot of stories in mainstream Western media about attacks on ethnic Chinese, on the Chinese viewpoint as expressed by CP leadership (who, I have to say, come off looking like total asses...China doesn't seem to need the West's help in embarrassing itself). But there is a diversity of opinion and reporting in the West. In China, diversity is stifled. This is clear to anyone who takes the time to survey the media landscape in general. "-- If everything is fine, Tibet will not have this riot. so there must be something wrong. -- Were the rioters, stoning and killing Han Chinese, not violating human rights of another people? To the westerners, letting the Tibetan rioters free-killing Han Chinese on the streets is 'respect for human rights' maybe West just plainly don't believe Han Chinese are humans. -- quoted from an overseas Chinese living in Canada." Don't draw simplistic conclusions from overgeneralizations. And try learning a little history. If you can't understand why some Tibetans would feel so frustrated and angry at Han Chinese that they would go to the extreme of deadly violence, you're either deluded or ignorant. Get an education.

nanheyangrouchuan

Thu, 20 Mar 2008 01:56:29 +0700

Great comeback kiddo! I thought being such a well-rounded liberal artsy-fartsy type you'd have something a bit more substantial to respond with.

Les Izmore

Thu, 20 Mar 2008 01:09:24 +0700

Get bit weirdo...

nanheyangrouchuan

Thu, 20 Mar 2008 00:42:10 +0700

Less, I know how dirty talk turns you on and that's the last thing I or anyone else wants.

Les Izmore

Thu, 20 Mar 2008 00:15:03 +0700

gaz-you're probably right. I will engage in a rigorous regimen of self examination and excoriation while here in Sin City.

bamboos

Wed, 19 Mar 2008 23:03:46 +0700

1989 -- Chinese thought that Beijing was wrong 2008 -- Chinese thinks that Beijing is right

bamboos

Wed, 19 Mar 2008 22:43:44 +0700

there is one thing very interesting in those Tibet news. In China, all media is about Tibet's violent riot; whilst at western media, it is all about Tibetan as victim of Beijing, and this incident provides a good reason to boycott Beijing Olympic. -- If everything is fine, Tibet will not have this riot. so there must be something wrong. -- Were the rioters, stoning and killing Han Chinese, not violating human rights of another people? To the westerners, letting the Tibetan rioters free-killing Han Chinese on the streets is 'respect for human rights' maybe West just plainly don't believe Han Chinese are humans. -- quoted from an overseas Chinese living in Canada. China and West media have 2 totally different viewpoints. How to talk and communicate with each other?

gazjoe

Wed, 19 Mar 2008 08:12:58 +0700

Apologies for that last comment. This situation is making me increasingly irritable, and my blood can boil. I take back what I said. Very stupid and rude of me.

gazjoe

Tue, 18 Mar 2008 21:09:58 +0700

les ... you know who I am, and I know who you are. Your posts are always so cocky, as if you know more than most. You don't. I've read your posts where you have called strangers "morons" and told folk to "get a life". Mate ... you are arrogant and a pseud. Enjoy your break back in San Francisco.

Les Izmore

Tue, 18 Mar 2008 08:43:30 +0700

Why no potty mouth from Mr. grouchuan? Why so reserved? Trying to regain some semblance of credibility? Too late crackpot... way too late. You won't address the well documented facts so you try to deflect, kind of an 'I'm rubber and you're glue' debating technique. Always the mark of a high intellect, in an elementary school student. You're weak, go away...

nanheyangrouchuan

Tue, 18 Mar 2008 05:21:00 +0700

@Less, "Most of my personal skepticism about the position of some of the people supporting the D. L. side is based on the historical record of the monk's treatment of women and minorities in Tibet pre-1959." And China's treatment of women and minorities has been better since when? But that gives China the right to invade and exterminate. And before you go off on Iraq, remember that wonderland aka China supported or supports such global winners as Pol Pot and Kim Jong Il, and these are long term "friends of China". Better to have enemies than friends like that.

Les Izmore

Tue, 18 Mar 2008 04:36:43 +0700

G-Joe- Sorry to take so long to get back to you but I have been traveling. I was trying to say what fjiofojif said so much more simply and cogently. We will never get an accurate count of the bodies from official government sources or sources with a political point to promote either. In a charged situation like this the 'body count' will emerge from an examination of murky eyewitness reports. You may be familiar with the Tlatelolco Massacre of Mexican university students before their politically charged Olympics in 1968. The government still insists '4 Dead, 20 Wounded' while eyewitness accounts range as high as 500 dead, shot by Army snipers from the buildings surrounding the square the students were protesting in. You are correct that the Chinese government will downplay their responsibility in this situation like any government would. Most of my personal skepticism about the position of some of the people supporting the D. L. side is based on the historical record of the monk's treatment of women and minorities in Tibet pre-1959. I believe that there are no white hats and black hats in this situation. That's partly what I was alluding to with my "muddled and complex" statement. Unfortunately my entire comment itself is muddled. Some saw it as support of the PRC gov't which it definitely was not intended to be. As an aside, I do think there is an appearance that the government has acted with uncharacteristic restraint in this particular instance. Whether that appearance is reality only time will tell. I guess the big lesson for me is that I shouldn't be posting from airports on stolen VIP accounts in the middle of red eye flights. This is a very emotionally charged political issue and I should have been more cogent in my comment. Please excuse... PS. Its Les and I do care about the individuals which is why I think seeing this violence as moves in the Free Tibet vs. Inviolable China debate is somewhat simplistic. The Han and Hui victims are 'fathers, mothers, daughters, sons, lovers, friends' too and that is something I tried but failed to state in my first post. I'm sorry that I used the phrase body count because it obviously carries deep connotations, my apologies.

gazjoe

Mon, 17 Mar 2008 19:41:47 +0700

I agree with fjiofojif

fjiofojif

Mon, 17 Mar 2008 11:02:20 +0700

Apparently gangs of Tibetans are going around killing and beating up people of other ethnicities, and destroying their property. It's possible to be entirely sympathetic to the Tibetan situation, and still be against killing people because of their ethnicity. This movement obviously won't lead to a free Tibet, it's just racial violence that's not going to achieve anything except a bloody crackdown from the Chinese military.

nanheyangrouchuan

Mon, 17 Mar 2008 10:50:43 +0700

And meanwhile the Shanghai stock market is down to 3800 from above 5000. The savings of millions of Chinese are gone...*poof*! Let the bodies hit floor!

WatchBagDVD

Mon, 17 Mar 2008 09:43:17 +0700

yeah, gazjoe, i disagree with me too. i'd initially written that in a more sarcastic way but somehow edited it out. i meant he's posturing as this paragon of reason and objectivity and using it as a screen for a BS argument.

gazjoe

Sun, 16 Mar 2008 18:49:55 +0700

and when you say ... from far away, from shanghai ... "When the damage is done and the bodies are counted we'll know better what is actually happening there". Well, that suggests to me that you don't give a f*ck about the deaths of individual people. About fathers, mothers, daughters, sons, lovers, friends. Looking forward to that number count, that you are hoping for. Please post that count as soon as you have it on your hands.

gazjoe

Sun, 16 Mar 2008 18:27:00 +0700

Dear Les ... answer this, please, if you can ... WHO ... WILL ... COUNT ... THE ... BODIES?

gazjoe

Sun, 16 Mar 2008 18:23:20 +0700

And I disagree with you watchbagdvd. You write that what Les says "is all very reasonable". No, no, never. Those words are NOT reasonable. They are the words of a yank so pissed off with the evils performed by his own country that he will stick up for the evils performed by another country, just to make himself feel better.

gazjoe

Sun, 16 Mar 2008 18:04:15 +0700

Answer that simple question, Lez. Who will count the bodies? If you cannot answer that question, then EVERYTHING you wrote before is apoligistic bullshit.

nanheyangrouchuan

Sun, 16 Mar 2008 14:54:50 +0700

The Hui are unfortunately caught in the middle of Beijing's game. They are encouraged to leave their native lands to dilute their population (don't want to many muslims in one place in China) and to supplant the native Tibetan population in the independent nation of Tibet. China is a dirty, shameless disaster zone.

gazjoe

Sun, 16 Mar 2008 14:38:33 +0700

Lez, mate, come on. You say: "When the damage is done and the bodies are counted we'll know better what is actually happening there". So ... who will count the bodies so that 'we'll know better what is actually happening there'"? Nineteen years after a major event in which many lost their lives in China's capital, and still nobody knows the death count. Who is being "naive", as you say?

WatchBagDVD

Sun, 16 Mar 2008 14:01:31 +0700

What you write is all very reasonable, Les, but it's also a little too easy to call for measured objectivity and patience from your own keyboard perch. Tibet is an occupied nation, if we define "nation" in terms of a distinct language, culture, religion and ethnicity. That's an unavoidable fact. One can argue *for* the occupation if one wants, sure, just as one can argue for that of Iraq by the US or Northern Ireland by the UK or the Basque region by Spain. But it's dishonest to equivocate to the point where that basic fact of *occupation* disappears (as it has, by and large, in the official PRC narrative). Another unavoidable fact is that if one nation occupies another, there will be resentment, resistance and violence, and that it will go on for a very long time. "Justification" for that violence or that of the occupier isn't that easy to "decide" and will probably never be decided to the satisfaction of all. It's "simplistic" and "naive" to think that such a decision could me made. If you're waiting to "decide when the violence is over," I think you'll be waiting a very long time--a least a good dozen reincarnations (as long as the reincarnations are approved by the People's Bureau of Religious Affairs, of course).

Les Izmore

Sun, 16 Mar 2008 09:51:59 +0700

The situation in Tibet right now is obviously very muddled and complex. The fact is that some people on this thread seem to want to be able to package this neatly as ideological battling between two easily identifiable opposing groups is also obvious. That is very simplistic thinking. When the damage is done and the bodies are counted we'll know better what is actually happening there. Meanwhile the demagogues on both sides of the issue use the suffering of others to push their own political views from the safety of their keyboard perches. Right now the important consideration must be that such violence is counterproductive to the aims of anyone who wants a peaceful Tibet. Whether there is justification for the police shooting rioters or Tibetans beating Han and Hui economic invaders we can decide when the violence is over. The naive political rhetoric that surrounds this issue is just more heat and really not helpful in solving a very complex multi-faceted problem.

Alex

Sun, 16 Mar 2008 04:43:26 +0700

Thanks for all this Shanghaiist, this is the reporting that I'm talking about. Nice work. It's crazy that the Chinese Government, after 50 years of oppression and subjugation, can turn one of the most peaceful and passive religious groups into a mob of frustrated and violent rioters.

MF

Sun, 16 Mar 2008 03:02:28 +0700

Does moving somewhere to work make you an invader? I don't think so. I wouldn't characterize Huis that way. I mean, should I say the family from Lanzhou who run the noodle shop near me "invaded" Shanghai? Or they just people trying to make a decent living? Or, if you think violence by T.'s vs. other groups is okay because of past history, could I beat you up if you are German, because some of my relatives were killed by the Nazis? Or if you are white, would it be okay for Native Americans to beat you up in the US, because after all, the whole continent was stolen from them? When the shoe is on the other foot, and you are being targeted, is it still okay?

moneyinabox

Sun, 16 Mar 2008 02:40:05 +0700

This is all Bjork's fault.

CCT

Sun, 16 Mar 2008 01:40:54 +0700

You've missed out on a key angle to the story. I hope it was just oversight, rather than political bias. Eyewitness reports from Western reporters include: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/mar/15/tibet.china2 http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article3556473.ece All of these eyewitness reports show that the deadly violence in Lhasa has been limited to Tibetans on a racial rampage. This is not political, it's ethnic-cleansing. The Chinese security forces are sitting by idly as Chinese are slaughtered... all in the hope of preserving face in the international community.

michaeldmanning

Sun, 16 Mar 2008 01:33:59 +0700

Don't assume that the Tibetans are targeting Hui Muslims just because they look like Han Chinese. One thing I learned while living in a Tibetan community in Qinghai for the month of January is that there is a tremendous amount of mistrust and animosity between Tibetans and Huis. Sure, the Huis might not have as much influence over policy in Beijing, but as unwelcome invaders they're just as bad as the Han Chinese in the eyes of most Tibetans.

vladivostok

Sat, 15 Mar 2008 23:40:36 +0700

My guess is because Hui Muslims essentially look the same as Hans. And yes, the D.L. has called for calm and non-violence among the Tibetans. The protests actually started peacefully, but nobody really expected them to turn nasty.

MF

Sat, 15 Mar 2008 23:24:06 +0700

If the D. Lama is as committed to peace and non-violence as he claims, it would be nice if he would ask his followers not to beat the crap out of Lhasa's Hui Muslims. Has he spoken out about this, and if not, why not? For an article with eyewitness accounts, look at the Christian Science Monitor, and go to the blog mentioned in the article, which is by an American Chinese guy. I am not a Muslim or anything, but I find it really disturbing that these people have become targets of violence.